- This topic has 10 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I can see roberto switching to either a 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 formation. I’d be surprised if he played 3 at the back – afterall, who could play there. By my reckoning we only have boyce & lopez as recogniseable centre backs, unless we appeal figueroa’s sending off & its rescinded. If it is 4 at the back this could mean stam at right back & either beausejour or jones at left back.
I think Martinez will be reluctant to change the system, it took him 2 and half years to change the other one! So think he will throw in young Golobart to go alongside Lopez and Boyce. Doesnt breed confidence that back 3!
I can see roberto switching to either a 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 formation. I’d be surprised if he played 3 at the back – afterall, who could play there. By my reckoning we only have boyce & lopez as recogniseable centre backs, unless we appeal figueroa’s sending off & its rescinded. If it is 4 at the back this could mean stam at right back & either beausejour or jones at left back.He also have Golobart who was on the bench for the City game.
I’d prefer if we stayed as 3-4-3. We’ve never played 4-4-2 and 4-3-3 was the formation we used when went on our losing game run last season. Why try and reinvent the wheel when we know we get success with a tried and tested formation?
I think Martinez will be reluctant to change the system, it took him 2 and half years to change the other one! So think he will throw in young Golobart to go alongside Lopez and Boyce. Doesnt breed confidence that back 3!Sorry, didn’t see your post before I made mine.
On the contrary abouut the back three. I’d look forward to see how they fare: Boyce we all know; Lopez has looked good: Golobart was outstanding at Inverness.
On the other hand, it could be a complete disaster!
It al be reet .The fans need to earn there coin for this game and get behind the team who ever plays.bridge over trouble water.hey hank.
Is Caldwell not available? I thought he was taken off last night to avoid been sent off and not because of an injury?
He was taken off because Bobby knew that the next foul he committed (regardless of how bad it was) would have seen him brandished with a 2nd caution & therefore sent off.
As it was, the first caution he got was his 5th of the season so he is suspended for the QPR game – if he’d been sent off (which to be fair he should have been) then he’d also have missed the Norwich & Arsenal games tooAs for our defence against QPR, personally I’d like to see Boyce, Lopez & Golobart (if Bobby doesn’t think he’s ready then to be frank he shouldn’t even be on the bench) – I suspect however that he’ll err on the side of caution & go with the back line that finished last night’s game (Beausejour, Lopez & Boyce, with Jones at LWB & Stam at RWB) & to be fair it didn’t do that bad once Bobby went with that last night even though we were a man down.
Personally though, I think that you’re asking for trouble when you start to play players out of position.I think a clue to how Bobby will go will be if he talks at his presss conference on Thursday about how he’d have no hesitation playing Golobart. If he does that then he won’t play him
EDIT – I have read rumours on the internet this morning however that Alcaraz will be fit for Saturday
I have also heard he his back after the new year (Alcaraz)
http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_premier_league/epl_injury_table.php
If he doesn’t play Golobart and there is no reason why he shouldn’t, but if he doesn’t then Jones could fill in for Figs.
Not sure Beausejour at left centre back is a good option – defensively he had a stinker…caught on the ball, misplaced passes a plenty. If Golobart is too risky (but my sense is he’s not) then I’d keep JB at wing back and put Jones in at LCB
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
