Scow Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 A 4-5-1..... ? Walker Maybury - Dublin - McCarthy - Stewart Gillespie - Williams - Joey - Hughes - Tiatto Connolly/de Vries A 4-4-2..... ? Walker Maybury - Dublin - McCarthy - Stewart Gillespie - Hughes - Joey - Tiatto Connolly - de Vries
Simon Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 I'd go 4-5-1 Walker Stearman Dublin McCarthy Maybury Gillespie Hughes Dawson Williams Stewart Connolly/De Vries Bench: Hirschfeld, Moore, Connolly/De Vries, Wilcox, Nalis I dont like to see Maybury on the left that much but I'd really like to see Stearman play! Tiatto's been poor so I'd maybe throw Stewart in or if hes any fitter, Wilcox.
TrickyTrev Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 ......................Walker Maybury...Dublin.....McCarthy...Stewart Gillespie...Nalis..Williams..Hughes..Wilcox ....................De Vries Subs- Connolly, Tiatto, Stearman, Dawson, Hirschfeld
breadandcheese Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 I don't think it really matters. There's optimism for you. My guess would be same team as against Cardiff, with Dublin moving to the back to replace Dabizas, Stearman coming in for Kenton and De Vries to start. Gillespie to remain on the bench.
Chimp Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 Walker Stearman - Dublin - McCarthy - Maybury Gillespie - Hughes - Nalis - Williams - Tiatto Connolly Subs: de Vries, Kenton, Heath, Wilcox, Hirschfeld
Scow Posted 22 April 2005 Author Posted 22 April 2005 On reflection, I'm not sure why I've selected Joey instead of Nalis. I imagine Levein will think Nalis played fairly well against Cardiff and will start him against Sunderland...
Ric Flair Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 WALKER STEARMAN DUBLIN MCCARTHY MAYBURY WILLIAMS NALIS TIATTO STEWART HUGHES CONNOLLY SUBS: DE VRIES, MOORE, KENTON, HIRSCHFIELD, GILLESPIE
Scow Posted 22 April 2005 Author Posted 22 April 2005 WALKER STEARMAN DUBLIN MCCARTHY MAYBURY WILLIAMS NALIS TIATTO STEWART HUGHES CONNOLLY SUBS: DE VRIES, MOORE, KENTON, HIRSCHFIELD, GILLESPIE 97033[/snapback] Not as ludicrous as people may think. Levein played a 3-6-1 once with Hearts for an away game in Europe...
Ric Flair Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 WALKER          STEARMAN      DUBLIN      MCCARTHY MAYBURY     WILLIAMS     NALIS      TIATTO      STEWART                         HUGHES                         CONNOLLY SUBS: DE VRIES, MOORE, KENTON, HIRSCHFIELD, GILLESPIE 97033[/snapback] Not as ludicrous as people may think. Levein played a 3-6-1 once with Hearts for an away game in Europe... 97036[/snapback] To beat Sunderland at their place we need to pack the midfield and fight them. I after looking at my team i'd actually put Hughes in for Nalis and then put Connolly in Hughes position and De Vries up on his own. I would play a truely ugly, direct game and **** them up. Chase and close them down like 11 Dickov's and hit them on the break. In attack we could have de Vries, Connolly, Hughes and Williams all breaking forward. Stearman could make runs aswell with Maybury dropping in to cover him. Definately what i'd play, kick **** out of them and really show them who's boss.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 WALKER           STEARMAN       DUBLIN       MCCARTHY MAYBURY      WILLIAMS     NALIS       TIATTO       STEWART                          HUGHES                         CONNOLLY SUBS: DE VRIES, MOORE, KENTON, HIRSCHFIELD, GILLESPIE 97033[/snapback] Not as ludicrous as people may think. Levein played a 3-6-1 once with Hearts for an away game in Europe... 97036[/snapback] To beat Sunderland at their place we need to pack the midfield and fight them. I after looking at my team i'd actually put Hughes in for Nalis and then put Connolly in Hughes position and De Vries up on his own. I would play a truely ugly, direct game and **** them up. Chase and close them down like 11 Dickov's and hit them on the break. In attack we could have de Vries, Connolly, Hughes and Williams all breaking forward. Stearman could make runs aswell with Maybury dropping in to cover him. Definately what i'd play, kick **** out of them and really show them who's boss. 97041[/snapback] I'd love to see that team Hoof. I'd perhaps swap Williams for Gudjonsson though. Really get into the ****ers.
Ric Flair Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 WALKER           STEARMAN       DUBLIN       MCCARTHY MAYBURY      WILLIAMS     NALIS       TIATTO       STEWART                          HUGHES                         CONNOLLY SUBS: DE VRIES, MOORE, KENTON, HIRSCHFIELD, GILLESPIE 97033[/snapback] Not as ludicrous as people may think. Levein played a 3-6-1 once with Hearts for an away game in Europe... 97036[/snapback] To beat Sunderland at their place we need to pack the midfield and fight them. I after looking at my team i'd actually put Hughes in for Nalis and then put Connolly in Hughes position and De Vries up on his own. I would play a truely ugly, direct game and **** them up. Chase and close them down like 11 Dickov's and hit them on the break. In attack we could have de Vries, Connolly, Hughes and Williams all breaking forward. Stearman could make runs aswell with Maybury dropping in to cover him. Definately what i'd play, kick **** out of them and really show them who's boss. 97041[/snapback] I'd love to see that team Hoof. I'd perhaps swap Williams for Gudjonsson though. Really get into the ****ers. 97046[/snapback] I think it's the way forward when the fans/players and manager are frustrated. Take their anger out through pure thuggery on the pitch. I guarantee we'd win aswell if Levein fired them up for it, which i'm sure he would given that style of team.
TrickyTrev Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 I like Hoof's team but I think Levein is a 4 at the back man and is not going to start experimenting at this stage of the season. The sentiment of a 5 man midfield that denies them any space is definately one I agree with, which is why I have goen for the 4-5-1 formation that at times has worked well away from home.
Hazza Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 I watched them when they lost at home to Reading the other week. They looked pretty steady in that game but then Reading sent on Sir Les and went more direct and it caused Sunderland a lot of problems, so i'd like to see Dublin up front, but with Dabizas out it seems as though he'll be needed at the back, good option for late in the game if we're trailing though. Anyway, i'd go for: ...................Walker Maybury - Dublin - McCarthy - Wilcox ...................Tiatto Gillespie - Hughes - Williams - Stewart ....................Connolly subs: Hirschfeld, Stearman, Gudjonsson, Moore, de Vries Sunderland are very good on the left, so i'm not sure Stearman would be best to start against Arca and McCartney, having just recovered from injury. Tiatto as the holding midfielder cause he'll get stuck in better than Joey. Connolly in because he's better than MdV to put it simply, also Blackburn with Dickov as the lone striker have proved quite successful, and Connors is a similiar player in terms of size and work rate. Speaking of Blackburn, i wouldn't mind if we play that way, pretty much kicking the sh*t out of 'em, as Hoof said
Knighton Matt Posted 22 April 2005 Posted 22 April 2005 GET DAWSON IN FOR A BIT OF BITE IN THE MIDFIELD!!!! HE CAN'T DO MUCH WORSE THAN THE CURRENT SHOWER!!!!
Tommy Posted 23 April 2005 Posted 23 April 2005 Walker Who else? Hirschfeld, yeh right Tiatto tithead has been awful recently but is better here than in midfield IMO Dublin only becuase badizas and maccy are out i think he will be moved back McCarthy (but having thought about this is he suspended for five bookings) Maybury back on the right where he belongs Stewart i dont like tiatto here, and he is better than wilcox, Hughes No need to explain really Williams Same as above Gillespie, hes playing well so he is in Connolly, top scorer with eleven, and no-one to push him out his place Moore, purely for the reason that De Vries is cack, and he needs to be started some time Bench Hirschfeld, Tiatto, Stearman, Gudjonsson, De Vries
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.