Jump to content

Midfield 3


Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, sweetsheri said:

Everyone fit

 

                Wildsmith

        Lees  Venancio  Pudil

        Lee   Joey  Bannanananan

Boyd                                    Reach   

            Forestieri

                Hooper

 

yep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Andy30 said:

        Hutch lees van

Hunt.                        Reach

      Lee joey bannan

          Hoops joao 

 

At the moment but can see him bringing in another centre half if possible. 

Venancio for Hutch + FF for Lee and agree. Only concern would be Bannan inability to shoot. Maybe Boyd in the LM role 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, torryowl said:

every feckers picking the new bloke and not one of us as seen him play ......if he's better than hutch,lee & bannan he must be some player 

Well let's just assume he does what he says he can, strong in the tackle, decent distribution and mobile, with the bonus that as a former club captain he shows a little organisation and leadership. That will be a nice improvement.

 

I think we'll end up 4-2-3-1. It's what the manager has favoured before. For the time being, the move to 5-3-2has made us more solid and has steadied the ship somewhat. Big test against Cardiff, but imagine the confidence if we scrap for a win.

 

I think after another full week with the squad we could see...

 

       Clare     Joey    Reach

 

 

A bit of bite and plenty of mobility, but I think Cardiff is too soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lord Snooty said:

               Joey

  Boyd                Reach

 

Think that's what we'll stick with.

 

I do find it ironic we've come to this for us to move forward though.

When it's been the answer has been there all along going right back to 2016.  Only stubbornness and our lunacy in the transfer market has slowed our progress.  IMO.

 

          Hutchinson 

Lee                        Bannan

 

It's quite staggering isn't it? Let's be right CC and his staff will have forgotten more about football than we will ever know but that midfield 3 was so glaringly obvious. I don't get it, after the Arsenal game why didn't we stick to that formation as we had it cracked, but no we then revert back to 442. I'd love to know what thought process goes into changing the entire shape of a team after a cracking performance like that. It still wee wees me off today as I was convinced we would have gone up if we stuck to that formation. In an ideal world maybe we were a big strong pacy striker and a winger short but that could have been remedied given the money we've wasted on rubbish.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Walt said:

It's quite staggering isn't it? Let's be right CC and his staff will have forgotten more about football than we will ever know but that midfield 3 was so glaringly obvious. I don't get it, after the Arsenal game why didn't we stick to that formation as we had it cracked, but no we then revert back to 442. I'd love to know what thought process goes into changing the entire shape of a team after a cracking performance like that. It still wee wees me off today as I was convinced we would have gone up if we stuck to that formation. In an ideal world maybe we were a big strong pacy striker and a winger short but that could have been remedied given the money we've wasted on rubbish.

This ^^^^ a thousand times Also, after changing, why did we stick with it for so long, when it was clear we were getting outnumbered in midfield every week

He tried to justify it by pointing to the results, which to be fair, were holding up

At what cost though? We sacrificed any attacking intent, which meant our games were devoid of any entertainment altogether It became a case of us just hanging on in there, which was always going to fall apart Grrrrrr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Walt said:

It's quite staggering isn't it? Let's be right CC and his staff will have forgotten more about football than we will ever know but that midfield 3 was so glaringly obvious. I don't get it, after the Arsenal game why didn't we stick to that formation as we had it cracked, but no we then revert back to 442. I'd love to know what thought process goes into changing the entire shape of a team after a cracking performance like that. It still wee wees me off today as I was convinced we would have gone up if we stuck to that formation. In an ideal world maybe we were a big strong pacy striker and a winger short but that could have been remedied given the money we've wasted on rubbish.

 

 

Quite agree. I think the key thing was the signing of Hooper.  I think they gambled his goals might take up up. But it soon became evident that he's suited to playing the deep linking role in a pairing. 

Of course, we could have gone three at the back to accommodate that.  Except for the fact that at that time we were woefully short at centre back....

 

To an extent our transfer policy shoved us away from the system. Had we signed a centre half earlier. A decent one. Instead of bringing in a further 3 strikers in Fletcher, Winnall and Rhodes then I do believe we'd have done it whether than be in a variation of 4-3-3 or 3-5-2.  And though we'll never know now and it's conjecture......I'd have taken any odds offered we'd have done it.  

Edited by Lord Snooty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, sweetsheri said:

       Lee   Joey  Bannan

Boyd                             Reach 

 

352

That looks quite good to be honest. Put Lees Fred and Hutch (if/when fit) behind and you have a strong defence and a midfield that can protect them yet feed the forwards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Walt said:

It's quite staggering isn't it? Let's be right CC and his staff will have forgotten more about football than we will ever know but that midfield 3 was so glaringly obvious. I don't get it, after the Arsenal game why didn't we stick to that formation as we had it cracked, but no we then revert back to 442. I'd love to know what thought process goes into changing the entire shape of a team after a cracking performance like that. It still wee wees me off today as I was convinced we would have gone up if we stuck to that formation. In an ideal world maybe we were a big strong pacy striker and a winger short but that could have been remedied given the money we've wasted on rubbish.

I previously stated that CC should of gone after the Hull game , we went into that game playing good football , CC bottled it for his big game going ultra cautious because they had a bigger stronger midfield than us , if we continued to play as we had we would of fooked Hull into oblivion. CC let us down badly that day .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, torryowl said:

every feckers picking the new bloke and not one of us as seen him play ......if he's better than hutch,lee & bannan he must be some player 

I’ll hazard you have got more chance of him being on the field.... there is no point in putting Hutchinson and lee in any team , they have had it . I hope this new lad makes the shirt his own 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Owling Wolfe said:

That looks quite good to be honest. Put Lees Fred and Hutch (if/when fit) behind and you have a strong defence and a midfield that can protect them yet feed the forwards. 

I'd rather have pudil at the back.

As much as i like Hutch as a bloke and his commitment he just hasn't got it in his legs anymore.

He comes in for a few games, breaks down and then is out for weeks again.. awful for him but it's reality

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, james o connor said:

I’ll hazard you have got more chance of him being on the field.... there is no point in putting Hutchinson and lee in any team , they have had it . I hope this new lad makes the shirt his own 

The new lad at least gives breathing space so they can get fit this time, instead of trying to force it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...