lou Posted 12 February 2010 Posted 12 February 2010 Any chance of a sandwich..?? I DONT DO KITCHENS!! My old man didnt marry me for my cooking skills That was funny! Was sat in the office laughing out loud - people looking at me like I was nuts!
lcfc_jme Posted 12 February 2010 Posted 12 February 2010 I DONT DO KITCHENS!! My old man didnt marry me for my cooking skills That was funny! Was sat in the office laughing out loud - people looking at me like I was nuts! Not the first time and doubt it'll be the last! Glad we were able to brighten your afternoon.
milan_foxes Posted 12 February 2010 Posted 12 February 2010 GK;Weale RB;Morrison CB's;Hobbs&Bruce LB;Berner RM;N'Guessan CM's;King&Oakley LM;Dyer FW's; Waghorn&Gallagher
lou Posted 12 February 2010 Posted 12 February 2010 Not the first time and doubt it'll be the last! Glad we were able to brighten your afternoon. Sad but true! I intend to grow old very disgracefully! You did!
Nationwider Posted 12 February 2010 Posted 12 February 2010 OK, here we go.When we play with 2 men in central midfield we are outnumbered and overwhelmed pretty much every time, why on earth do you think Pearson played Oakley in that horrible narrow right position? Gallagher is not the man to 'lead the line'! He has no pace, no presence in the air and his instincts in front of goal are not good enough. His role is that of a 'second' or support striker or as I prefer, a creative midfielder alongside Oakley and King. In either position he makes things happen around the box, and he, himself is more dangerous striking from distance. Really get some pace up front, ideally with Kermorgant to lead the line with Waghorn on the left and N'Guessan on the right, both of whom can cut inside, on their stronger foot, to support the center forward. If Yanni is still out as seems likely, Danni goes central with Dyer on the left which still leaves us with 3 pacy front players. Gallagher takes the set pieces, he is way better than Oakley or any one else for that matter. If Solano is to get a game, then for me it has to be at right back. Loving the vaguely condescending opener there. I never suggested Gallagher should lead the line. I don't think anyone has ever suggested he's that player. S****horpe will be set up to take the away point so they'll be chuffed to bits if Waghorn and N'Guessan are constantly cutting inside into a brick wall of a midfield and defence. N'Guessan is far better with the ball over the defence - he's not going to prance through it like Ricky Villa at Wembley. Pearson has started with N'Guessan and Dyer probably only 2-3 times, so fair play if he does, but I'm not sure he will. Maybe the lack of forwards will force his hand? And I think our team formation is virtually the same anyway - Gallagher playing behind a main striker is effectively a 4-3-3, or whatever you want to call it. It's just the personnel that are different.
marbelladave Posted 12 February 2010 Posted 12 February 2010 Loving the vaguely condescending opener there.I never suggested Gallagher should lead the line. I don't think anyone has ever suggested he's that player. S****horpe will be set up to take the away point so they'll be chuffed to bits if Waghorn and N'Guessan are constantly cutting inside into a brick wall of a midfield and defence. N'Guessan is far better with the ball over the defence - he's not going to prance through it like Ricky Villa at Wembley. Pearson has started with N'Guessan and Dyer probably only 2-3 times, so fair play if he does, but I'm not sure he will. Maybe the lack of forwards will force his hand? And I think our team formation is virtually the same anyway - Gallagher playing behind a main striker is effectively a 4-3-3, or whatever you want to call it. It's just the personnel that are different. Sorry to be so vague, will try harder! The point of playing 4-3-3 is that the wide men have to play well forward, N'Guessan picking up the ball on the half way line and being closed down by the opposition midfield is a waste of time, 25 yards out and attacking the box is a very different proposition, as is his ability with balls played over or through the defense. Generally I prefer him on the left, so you are right regarding him and Dyer in the same starting XI. But without Fryatt the whole dynamic is changed, unless we are going right out on a limb, we need some one to lead the line and to me the best options are Kermorgant or N'Guessan. With Yanni still not fit (or firing), for me it has to be Danni down the middle, no argument. Waghorn is shaping up on the right hand side which leaves Dyer the only viable option on the left, at least no one can say we lack pace in attack! The midfield is also a big issue, Oakley, King and Wellens are looking too 'samey' as a combination, we need some one who can offer something different and at the moment that is Gallagher. I think it is important that he and his 2 partners, Oakley and King on current form, are all allowed to pretty much play their natural games. None of this 'attacking mid' or 'holding' roles, they all have to play box to box and as a unit, I know we will not get much out of Gallagher defensively but as long as he makes a contribution, that is probably enough. The real question is whether Pearson will have the bottle to keep playing 4-3-3 and push his wide men well forward, something he did not do the other night, much to our detriment. Or, horror of horrors, will he use the absence of Fryatt and the arrival of Solano to go back to the wretched 4-4-2 that has served us so poorly this season>
TrickyTrev Posted 13 February 2010 Posted 13 February 2010 WealeMorrison Hobbs Brown Berner Oakley King Wellens Gallagher Howard N'Guessan Gets balls in the box time. Whilst Howard is standing 10 yards outside of it. To play the lead striker in the Chelsea/Barca style 433 you need to be extremely athletic. To be holding the ball up with your back to goal one minute to bursting into the box the next. Stevo can't play this role.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.