At the time of posting…

This topic has 8 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by Anonymous.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

Author

Posts
8 February 2012 at 6:58 pm #80888
Chris Griffin
Player
… I have made 5434 posts.

5434. Now then, THAT would be a winning formation. A solid 5 at the back, a good defensive cordon of 4 in front of them, and 3 attackling midfielders. Only issue I can see is that we don’t have 4 half-decent strikers :(
8 February 2012 at 7:12 pm #80889
Sammy
Player
So you think starting with 16 outfield players will make a difference?
8 February 2012 at 7:19 pm #80891
Chris Griffin
Player
You’d like to think it would at least bring the midfield closer to the attack.

Maybe
8 February 2012 at 7:22 pm #80892
Silence
Player
Or the opportunity for more short passes to be made in our own half.

We could also have three players ready to accept a short corner.
9 February 2012 at 12:13 am #80903
Tony
Player
Utd would get away with that formation if Howard Webb was reffing!
9 February 2012 at 1:12 am #80915
Silence
Player
There was a play in the Superbowl on Sunday when the Patriots had 12 players on the pitch. They did get penalised though.
10 February 2012 at 3:44 am #80995
The Egg
Player
We’d probably still get caught out at the back with 16 men.
10 February 2012 at 4:12 am #80998
horc
Manager
There was a play in the Superbowl on Sunday when the Patriots had 12 players on the pitch. They did get penalised though.

You don’t watch that shite do you Garswood? It’s RL in a party frock.
10 February 2012 at 4:20 am #81001
Anonymous
There was a play in the Superbowl on Sunday when the Patriots had 12 players on the pitch. They did get penalised though.

You don’t watch that shite do you Garswood? It’s RL in a party frock.[/quote]

Thugby with helmets and slightly more entertaining
Author

Posts