In case you were not aware, the 5000 in the South Stand is a home end for rugby. The 1500 or so Huddersfield fans were at the other end.

Lets hope for a Huddersfield double this weekend.[/quote]

Which stand was you sat in muttyshitedog ?

While your answering that one, which stand are you sitting in tomorrow at the stadium of light.

Sorry donnys page, I would not dream of supporting anything griff says if there was any sort of doubt, but you said :-

You post “after 40 years working in the Horticulture industry and associating with some of the top sports turf experts in the country” If your experience is 40 years in the trade why state this when it is clearly not so.

Even laymen like most of us can see and have stated the pitch is in pretty good nick at the moment, as Leylandlatic correctly posts, the amount of rain put down on Saturday alone, playing on it would have destroyed the DW pitch in the past.

One thing I have noticed is that we now have some gantry frame lighting units that are used to substitute sunlight and aid growing in winter on damaged areas, I have been down to the stadium a few times midweek this season and they have always been on, I don’t think we had these in the past and they may be the reason for the improvements.

numpty boy.
I have done all of the above EXCEPT fish the canal in Wigan, especially opposite the old bone works.(well, not for a very long time anyway)

nowt worse than making a cunt of yourself whilst trying and failing to make a cunt out of someone else eh sonny.

now back to fishing.
I have just been to the River Annan for 3 days, pity it was flooded.
BTW it’s not in Wigan

Paul Young[/quote]

John don’t rise to it you need ‘love of the common people’

I never actually said when it would start. But as usual, you have read things that weren’t written and/or not read things that were.

“Almost nobody” plays that way was the phrase I used, not “consigned to history”. But you crack on, just make shit up like you always do.

Maybe it doesn’t to you, but I was addressing the specific desire of Donny for us to play with two strikers and two wingers. But again, that would require you to read what was written rather than make up stuff to suit your argument.

Bored now. Standish, WGTB and others seem to have got it and are in the process od successfully blowing a hole in your opinion or whatever other over the top, ridiculous phrase it was that you used.[/quote]

Plenty accusations of what I have and haven’t read or digested yet you do the same in your very last statement about my opinion, when you don’t have a clue what my opinion is.
My contribution in this debate is about you and your opinions and the way you dismiss with sarcasm or insults anyone who differs from you, so I pointed out all the teams that are playing a front two and the success they are having doing so, despite anything you claim.

If you want to know my preferred line up or formation it is exactly the same as what Martinez wanted to play – in general a mobile front 3 with no player tied to a fixed role like we played with Kone, McManaman and Maloney or the season before with Moses, Di Santo and Maloney, but as Martinez also said he also didn’t want to be tied to any one system and unlike you neither do I.

Man City 68
Liverpool 58

Leicester 52
Burnley 42
Derby 57
Forest 46
Reading 47

Brentford 51
Wolves 49
Orient 59
Rotherham 51

Leading scorers in top three divisions, all play 2 up front, look at the league tables where they are.

They may not play wingers on both flanks but use full backs to get forward and that fill that roll, but it shows that “having an outside toilet” can be quite successful.[/quote]

Well done there, not “bolding” the bit about playing 2 wingers as well as two strikers to competely suit your argument and diminish mine. You’re not a woman are you? ;)

I’ll just respond re the top two in your list because I don’t claim to have the encyclopaedic knowledge of the formations of many teams down to League 1, and if you do, you probably need to get out more.

Liverpool do have two strikers – and two bloody good ones at that – but they do not play as a conventional front two, as in the old typical 442 formation with two wide men – or wingers – which is what our friend Donny has been talking about.

As for City, well you can have that one, for two reasons:

a) they hardly fall into the same category as other teams do they and in any case, again, they play far more fluidly than just as a conventional front two. Granted, at least when Dzeko and Aguerro play together, there is a big ‘un and a little ‘un which Donny might recognise from his old Shoot! magazines.

b) I said “almost nobody” plays that way which implies exceptions. I accept that I didn’t make this clear by putting it in bold; but had I done so, you would probably only have removed it.

There! Didn’t insult anybody there, did I? Very sarcastic, I grant you, but a) that’s me and b) so was yours.[/quote]

Your proposed sabbatical didn’t last very long.

You claimed and have done for a while that 2 up front is consigned to history, my list sort of muddies the water of your opinion would you not think?

Doesn’t matter about the personnel, team or formation whether its 2 wingers, wing backs or fullbacks getting forward all those teams play 2 out and out strikers and they are the highest scoring teams and title challengers or leaders in all three leagues.

“Too Much Information”

Is that Roy Marlow’s brother ?

Go away, the big children are having an argument, here. Nothing to do with the likes of you.[/quote]

You call that stuff an argument. Wait until I get going.[/quote]

Have you just thanked yourself in an alter ego?[/quote]

It was a joke, based on a question I was asked in another thread, but as always I wouldn’t expect you to understand.