- This topic has 20 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Whether it is the right 2 up front or not it would appear that this could be MM’s next move? The last paragraph of this interview sees McClean strengthen what the 2 up front fans have been trying to get across for God knows how long! What does he know though eh? He’s only a player and not a manager! ;)
http://www.wiganlatics.co.uk/news/article/james-mcclean-wigan-birmingham-goal-waghorn-2199719.aspx
Did I just hear that right?? The team third in the Premier League play 4-2-3-1???? Surely not.The Prem is a whole different beast! The championship on the other hand is a league were 4-4-2 has reaped the benefits more than any other formation! Now if playing 4-4-2 consistently for several games on the trot doesn’t come to fruition then it can be deemed not the answer for us, but until then……………….
Did I just hear that right?? The team third in the Premier League play 4-2-3-1???? Surely not.
The Prem is a whole different beast! The championship on the other hand is a league were 4-4-2 has reaped the benefits more than any other formation! Now if playing 4-4-2 consistently for several games on the trot doesn’t come to fruition then it can be deemed not the answer for us, but until then……………….[/quote]
You do realise it’s possible to play two up front without rigidly lining up as 442 don’t you? No, probably not.
Did I just hear that right?? The team third in the Premier League play 4-2-3-1???? Surely not.
The Prem is a whole different beast! The championship on the other hand is a league were 4-4-2 has reaped the benefits more than any other formation! Now if playing 4-4-2 consistently for several games on the trot doesn’t come to fruition then it can be deemed not the answer for us, but until then……………….[/quote]
You do realise it’s possible to play two up front without rigidly lining up as 442 don’t you? No, probably not.[/quote]
Yes I do, not sure why you are trying to be condescending with me? I mentioned once before that formations can be misleading and ambiguous the best of times but we have been playing an actual lone striker with no foil or support for quite a while now! Only in the last few games have we seen this change albeit without a recognised striker! We can’t have it all I guess!
Did I just hear that right?? The team third in the Premier League play 4-2-3-1???? Surely not.
The Prem is a whole different beast! The championship on the other hand is a league were 4-4-2 has reaped the benefits more than any other formation! Now if playing 4-4-2 consistently for several games on the trot doesn’t come to fruition then it can be deemed not the answer for us, but until then……………….[/quote]
You do realise it’s possible to play two up front without rigidly lining up as 442 don’t you? No, probably not.[/quote]
Yes I do, not sure why you are trying to be condescending with me? I mentioned once before that formations can be misleading and ambiguous the best of times but we have been playing an actual lone striker with no foil or support for quite a while now! Only in the last few games have we seen this change albeit without a recognised striker! We can’t have it all I guess![/quote]
Well actually I would disagree with this in light of what Mackay has been saying recently, and I think it is nothing to do with a 442 formation.
We have seen the lone striker on the team sheet, however, I believe that he has been instructing other players to act as “the foil” in that support role but the lazy arsed, overpaid, sulking, prima donna’s have not stepped up to the plate (except McClean). It’s time for these wantaways to leave, let Mackay get on with managing, let us get on with our football and get back to winning ways – we don’t want players who can’t be arsed.
I don’t give a shiite how many we have up front, stick 4 up there if you want.
Scoring is not the main problem its the Sunday league schoolboy defending that’s put us were were are.I can think of at least 6 games off the top of my head were we could have taken 3 points if it weren’t for the calamitous defending…An out of shape Ridgewell is certainly not the answer
Did I just hear that right?? The team third in the Premier League play 4-2-3-1???? Surely not.
The Prem is a whole different beast! The championship on the other hand is a league were 4-4-2 has reaped the benefits more than any other formation! Now if playing 4-4-2 consistently for several games on the trot doesn’t come to fruition then it can be deemed not the answer for us, but until then……………….[/quote]
You do realise it’s possible to play two up front without rigidly lining up as 442 don’t you? No, probably not.[/quote]
Yes I do, not sure why you are trying to be condescending with me? I mentioned once before that formations can be misleading and ambiguous the best of times but we have been playing an actual lone striker with no foil or support for quite a while now! Only in the last few games have we seen this change albeit without a recognised striker! We can’t have it all I guess![/quote]
It’s just your turn ;)
I’ve said it many times before, with the right pegs in the right holes, 3-5-2 would be my preference, if we are insisting on giving it a name.
I don’t give a shiite how many we have up front, stick 4 up there if you want.
Scoring is not the main problem its the Sunday league schoolboy defending that’s put us were were are.I can think of at least 6 games off the top of my head were we could have taken 3 points if it weren’t for the calamitous defending…An out of shape Ridgewell is certainly not the answer
Our defence does seem to get away with it in terms of taking responsibility as we seem to focus on our lack of goals.
Who are these pegs, though? We’ve just let Tavernier go, who was first-choice right wing back for a month. And that five-man midfield is losing some flair with Espinoza and Maloney departing. Are we going to see a return to Boyce at right wing back? Or at centre half, with Perch going out there? Could Barnett please replace Kiernan? Are Wastson, McCann and Cowie too similar to play together? Will we ever see Huws or Kwist again?
Who are these pegs, though? We’ve just let Tavernier go, who was first-choice right wing back for a month. And that five-man midfield is losing some flair with Espinoza and Maloney departing. Are we going to see a return to Boyce at right wing back? Or at centre half, with Perch going out there? Could Barnett please replace Kiernan? Are Wastson, McCann and Cowie too similar to play together? Will we ever see Huws or Kwist again?Probably a typo with Watson but not far off the mark! :)
Who are these pegs, though? We’ve just let Tavernier go, who was first-choice right wing back for a month. And that five-man midfield is losing some flair with Espinoza and Maloney departing. Are we going to see a return to Boyce at right wing back? Or at centre half, with Perch going out there? Could Barnett please replace Kiernan? Are Wastson, McCann and Cowie too similar to play together? Will we ever see Huws or Kwist again?That’s the question isn’t it, and until the end of January we probably won’t know. With what we have now, and given what I think I know of Mackay’s thinking, and assumig no injuries, and without thunking too deeply about it, how’s about this?:-
Carson
Boyce Ramis Kiernan
Perch Ridgewell
Mccann Kvist Forshaw
MacClean Waghorn
Not convinced about Kiernan, and I would have put Ridgewell there except I can’t see who else could play LWB. Maybe put Perch there with Boyce as RWB, as you alluded to Martin, and bring in Taylor, or Caldwell or Rogne??? Not convinced about that either, but there are two weeks of the transfer window left.
And before someobody jumps in with their size tens about MacClean not being a proper striker I’ll refer to you to my qualifier above: “and given what I think I know of Mackay’s thinking”.
I’ll leave you all to pull that to pieces. I have a full day ahead of me, I’m afraid. ;)
It seems Mackay”s trying to put together a team of steady eddie’s, older heads to pull us out the muck pit and refuses to take chances and use all options already here.
Then we have the nerve took look at some dutch striker having froze out the last 2 purchases.With a knickname of “Immobile lamppost’ he should fit in well with ‘Roadcone Ramis’ and “Kerb crawl Kiernan’
It seems Mackay”s trying to put together a team of steady eddie’s, older heads to pull us out the muck pit and refuses to take chances and use all options already here.Then we have the nerve took look at some dutch striker having froze out the last 2 purchases.With a knickname of “Immobile lamppost’ he should fit in well with ‘Roadcone Ramis’ and “Kerb crawl Kiernan’
The nerve?
Don’t you think that because the last two strikers were “frozen out” by a manager who clearly doesn’t rate them therefore needs to replace them?
In fact, don’t you think at all?
Or did you just manufacture that post to make those awful nickname pun-type comments?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
