- This topic has 27 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
4 5 1 delort the 1
Callum and Bambi in midfield part of the 5.Or, it was 4-3-3
It all depends if you’re a glass half full or half empty man, really.
I certainly saw it as 433. Delort was not left isolated on his own like the lone strikers used to be under Bobby.
4 5 1 delort the 1
Callum and Bambi in midfield part of the 5.Or, it was 4-3-3
It all depends if you’re a glass half full or half empty man, really.
I certainly saw it as 433. Delort was not left isolated on his own like the lone strikers used to be under Bobby.[/quote]
On the scrolling team list on the tellys in the concourses the team was described as 4-3-3.
I know Latics telly people aren’t in with the tactical discussions, but they (like everyone around me) saw that team as 4-3-3.
And who the hell is Bambi?
Yon mon from Londonderry via Sunderland. He is like Bambi on ice. So in days gone by we must have played something like 4 2 4 if we call wingers ‘up front’.
Funny how different people see things because everyone around me saw it has just another variation of the lone striker with Delort having too much to do on his own up front with no options or much support.
But the post was about good effort and this was an hard working good effort by the team against a disappointing Forest side.Yon mon from Londonderry via Sunderland. He is like Bambi on ice. So in days gone by we must have played something like 4 2 4 if we call wingers ‘up front’.
Funny how different people see things because everyone around me saw it has just another variation of the lone striker with Delort having too much to do on his own up front with no options or much support.
But the post was about good effort and this was an hard working good effort by the team against a disappointing Forest side.Isn’t it just? You don’t rate McLean but you’re an Espinoza fan?
No further questions.
Neither of them are that good really if compared with Lee McCulloch or Bainsey. Just compared these two simply because that’s the standard we need to be to compete in this league.
Neither of them are that good really if compared with Lee McCulloch or Bainsey. Just compared these two simply because that’s the standard we need to be to compete in this league.McLean and McCulloch are completely different types of player. And Baines is an England international. But I agree, give us 11 current England internationals and we might very quickly rise to the dizzy heights of 15th. Maybe.
That’s if they had the chance to play together and gel and not getting rested or dropped or shifted around each week.
Yep, that’s it – you just change the subject.
Who do you think was better, Roy Tunks or Peter Houghton?
What kind of apples do you prefer by the way, oranges?
Neither of them are that good really if compared with Lee McCulloch or Bainsey. Just compared these two simply because that’s the standard we need to be to compete in this league.
McLean and McCulloch are completely different types of player. And Baines is an England international. But I agree, give us 11 current England internationals and we might very quickly rise to the dizzy heights of 15th. Maybe.[/quote]
McClean plays in the same position that McCulloch played so it’s a decent enough comparison.
He plays on the left side of midfield with the main difference being McCulloch played in a 442 formation so always had someone to play it to as the two forwards would stretch the defence and leave a lot more space for him, and still leaving a forward in the box.I like Mclean’s pace and the way he runs at the defence, but feel a bit sorry for him as he hardly ever has anyone to cross the ball to.
Our loan forward is always busy trying to find space, but without support in the box, he leaves McClean with no option but to double back and play it to his fellow midfielders or defenders.It is so easy for the defenders as they have no one to mark and just make Mclean’s and McManaman’s job so much harder as they can also afford to double up on them with having no-one in the box to mark.
On a positive note, I was glad to see we had a left back playing at left back, and overall I don’t think Taylor has done too bad.
He may not be our ‘best left back ever’, but its better than moving players around just to accommodate Boyce or Kiernan.I thought Peter Houghton was better at Latics before he left for Nob End and Tunksy was better at Latics after he arrived from Nob End.
Also I am quite partial to a Coxs Orange Pippin Apple.
Three points at Wolves is easily achievable. If Holt ran rings round them we should get half a dozen with Andy up front. Maybe a match for Fortune this one, We wont have to worry about what they have in the way of strikers after all we got shut of Dicko in favour of our hotshots. Five nil Latics without breaking sweat!I thought Peter Houghton was better at Latics before he left for Nob End and Tunksy was better at Latics after he arrived from Nob End.
Also I am quite partial to a Coxs Orange Pippin Apple.
Three points at Wolves is easily achievable. If Holt ran rings round them we should get half a dozen with Andy up front. Maybe a match for Fortune this one, We wont have to worry about what they have in the way of strikers after all we got shut of Dicko in favour of our hotshots. Five nil Latics without breaking sweat!Well, that’s no less shit than you normally talk ;)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
