But I want Eaden and Thompson. And Hayes in the hole. Striker Striker Hayes McPhail Howard Wing Back Wing Back Hassel Carbon Kay
RE: But I want Eaden and Thompson. I'll play right wingback for you Windy, I can quite often get a ball over 6' in the air when I kick it sideways. I'm not tracking back though, as I'll be vomiting on the touchline.
Hayes is the new... Andy Liddell. One of two things would happen if we adopted wing backs. 1) The wing backs would never get over the half way line. 2) They would get forward and our back 3 would be torn apart.
I've mused over this one and certainly think back to how Bassett changed the formation for the play offs, and how well it worked. but I think the balance in the side is right, the personnel are used to the formation and all know what they're doing. we're creating chances and still reasonably solid at the back, the only failing being missed chances. all strikers go through barren patches, just unfortunate both of ours are having it at same time. fingers crossed, it'll come good. like buses, I think if they get one, they'll get enough to keep us top six. if I was going to make any change at all, I'd drop Devaney and play Howard on the left, Kay alongside McPhail and reinstate Hassell alongside Reid. that should allow Shuker license to get forward, maybe link up with his 'buddie' Mardiello. we did Oldham 4 nil when Hayes and Mardi played together, I believe.
RE: I've mused over this one You mused over it. We're you in your study, with a pipe and sherry and that.
RE: But I want Eaden and Thompson. I've always thought Shuker would make a good wing back, he's good in the tackle, terrier like and can run all day, not sure who the other wing back would be, Ozzie perhaps? Devaney could then be on the bench in case we need a formation change or cover for a forward or Hayes.
I'd be happy with that. Worth a go. But I would rather play a system like Chelsea used last season. Where they had a </p><ul>[*]flat back four (Ferreira Carvalho Terry Gallas / Austin Reid Hassell Heckingbottom)[*]then a holding player (Makelele / Kay)[*]2 central midfielders (Lampard Jarosik / McPhail Howard)[*]2 floaters behind the front 2 (Robben Duff / Hayes Shuker)[*]1 up top (Drogba / Richards)[/list] With the ball the formation would become a 4-3-3, but without it when defending, the 2 floaters slip back to midfield making a 4-5-1 and, hopefully, harder to break down.</p> So there.</p>
He did But had the wrong players for it to work. He did it wrong too. The 2 "floaters" were not aggressive enough at going going forward.</p> He used big bald bazza too! Richards is more suited to the position. And Hayes would be the perfect player for the Robben/Duff position.</p>
Reasons why Shuker should not be a wing back 1) He can't cross 2) He can't run (his size makes him look like he's going quickly) 3) He can't defend 4) He's a lazy lovely person 5) He's probably off to Luton in the Summer. That should do it.
But would the two floaters give enough cover to the midfield/fullbacks and would they provide good enough service to the lone forrad
RE: But would Thats where a good manager comes into his own. Work on the training ground etc. Im quite sure it would work. The same argument would apply to the wingbacks debate. Asking 2 players to do more than one job and all that applies to both styles.
You mean like Oldham play... Just a thought. like..</p> Colgan</p> Hassell, Kay, Reid,</p> Austin, Heckingbottom,</p> Howard, McPhail</p> Shuker,</p> Richards, Nardiello. </p>
