|
Post by aghast on Aug 20, 2017 19:42:38 GMT
I love it on here when you can be criticised if you go to no games, just a few games, or watch every game.
Everyone is equal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2017 19:46:34 GMT
Careful Steve. If you don't express sainthood with Browner and Locks you might get some abuse. Much as I saw it, except I don't see what Lines brings to the party any more. Sercombe is such quality Lines is just excess baggage in my opinion. I'd put Broadbent in alongside Sweeney, and leave Lines out. That gives us an extra threat in the air from corners and free kicks, whilst Broadbent is also pacier than Sweeney. It could be a good year to grow him into the position so we no longer need Sweeney. Wouldn't we be one short in midfield then? Lines has still got a lot to offer it just seems he sits deep at times instead of doing his pressing forward runs which he did yesterday though, acting on the managers instructions no doubt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2017 22:14:40 GMT
I love it on here when you can be criticised if you go to no games, just a few games, or watch every game. Everyone is equal. Dont come on here with your extreme left wing ideas
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 1:07:58 GMT
Careful Steve. If you don't express sainthood with Browner and Locks you might get some abuse. Much as I saw it, except I don't see what Lines brings to the party any more. Sercombe is such quality Lines is just excess baggage in my opinion. I'd put Broadbent in alongside Sweeney, and leave Lines out. That gives us an extra threat in the air from corners and free kicks, whilst Broadbent is also pacier than Sweeney. It could be a good year to grow him into the position so we no longer need Sweeney. Wouldn't we be one short in midfield then? Lines has still got a lot to offer it just seems he sits deep at times instead of doing his pressing forward runs which he did yesterday though, acting on the managers instructions no doubt. Its a new fangled formation 5-2-3 ,ok our opponents will water all over us in midfield but if were lucky enough to somehow get a corner we will have broadbent with his massive aerial threat.
|
|
|
Post by RD on Aug 21, 2017 6:44:44 GMT
Thanks Steve. Good to see such positive remarks across pretty much the entire team.
Sercombe looks an outstanding signing. If we can keep Bodin, the two of them give me real hope.
Maybe Nichols will be our 20 goal-a-season striker; if not - and we are able to get one - we really do look to have a pretty good side IMO.
|
|
|
Post by alvestongas on Aug 21, 2017 6:53:47 GMT
Careful Steve. If you don't express sainthood with Browner and Locks you might get some abuse. Much as I saw it, except I don't see what Lines brings to the party any more. Sercombe is such quality Lines is just excess baggage in my opinion. I'd put Broadbent in alongside Sweeney, and leave Lines out. That gives us an extra threat in the air from corners and free kicks, whilst Broadbent is also pacier than Sweeney. It could be a good year to grow him into the position so we no longer need Sweeney. Are you really suggesting Lockyer and Brown don't deserve sainthood after everything they have given to our club. Any criticism of these two is pretty unnecessary and unfounded. They both were excellent Saturday. Good win good 3 points good report Steve.
|
|
Marshy
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,119
|
Post by Marshy on Aug 21, 2017 7:42:15 GMT
Cheers Steve good report; It sounded like a tremendous performance and a well deserved 3 points, real shame about the 2 goals at the end but that shouldn't distract from the good all round feel factor this win / performance will give us UTG!
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 21, 2017 7:52:17 GMT
Bodin Two goals and could have been more,could he yet make a centre forward? Superb header. 8 Not sure he should be moved to centre forward, in a front 3 the centre forward has to do a lot of playing with his back to goal. I would leave him where he is, which is effectively as one of 2 inside-forwards, seems ideally suited to his set of skills
|
|
Marshy
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,119
|
Post by Marshy on Aug 21, 2017 7:55:23 GMT
Bodin Two goals and could have been more,could he yet make a centre forward? Superb header. 8 Not sure he should be moved to centre forward, in a front 3 the centre forward has to do a lot of playing with his back to goal. I would leave him where he is, which is effectively as one of 2 inside-forwards, seems ideally suited to his set of skills I agree; once our forwards start scoring too, we will really be in business!
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Aug 21, 2017 8:10:02 GMT
Bodin Two goals and could have been more,could he yet make a centre forward? Superb header. 8 Not sure he should be moved to centre forward, in a front 3 the centre forward has to do a lot of playing with his back to goal. I would leave him where he is, which is effectively as one of 2 inside-forwards, seems ideally suited to his set of skills I don't get this obsession with trying to play Bodin as a centre-forward because he has scored a few goals.
He is scoring goals where he is, so fecking leave him there I say. If people actually watch us and ipen there eye, most of his goals seem to come from him cutting inside and take defenders on, because he has space. space he likely wouldn't get played as a centre-forward.
Football can be a simple game, but some want to complicate it. We have something that works. levae it alone and solve one problem, not potentially create an extra one
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Aug 21, 2017 8:35:42 GMT
Agree pp. Great header but most of his goals as you said come from running at people. We definitely need to leave him where he is and let's not encourage DC to start one of his projects with BB. He's fine just as he is. Teams find it very hard to deal with BB when he has the ball in midfield and runs at them. I suspect if he played as a CF he would just be marked out the game and blimey we haven't got anyone else who plays wide now apart from Moore so moving BB would leave us even more exposed in midfield! Whilst some think we might need a new big number 9 I would be surprised if it happens. Telford, Nichols, Ellis and Rory will be the four forwards we go with I think. DCs record of playing with a big 9 isn't really there, he much prefers a more mobile player like Taylor and Nichols. I hope I'm wrong as it would be a good option but I don't think so. Whatever, I'll be glad when Nichols is off the mark scoring- wise. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Aug 21, 2017 8:53:46 GMT
Bodin Two goals and could have been more,could he yet make a centre forward? Superb header. 8 Not sure he should be moved to centre forward, in a front 3 the centre forward has to do a lot of playing with his back to goal. I would leave him where he is, which is effectively as one of 2 inside-forwards, seems ideally suited to his set of skills Totally agree Bodin as a target man is a terrible idea. The bloke is first class where he is.
|
|
|
Post by stevek192 on Aug 21, 2017 9:05:52 GMT
The point I was making was that both of his goals Saturday were not playing in his normal position and were classic centre forward goals - a little bit of greediness and confidence in a tight space and a classic header that any centre forward would be proud of. I am not saying we should change him but IMO it would be a good option to get a couple of direct wingers in whereby they wouldn't necessarily be a replacement for Billy but give us more weaponry. If Billy was having a poor game on the wing it would be an option instead of substituting him. At the moment we really do not have a winger worth mentioning.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 21, 2017 10:59:46 GMT
Not sure he should be moved to centre forward, in a front 3 the centre forward has to do a lot of playing with his back to goal. I would leave him where he is, which is effectively as one of 2 inside-forwards, seems ideally suited to his set of skills I agree; once our forwards start scoring too, we will really be in business! 2 goals in the previous game scored by our forwards...
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 21, 2017 11:07:04 GMT
The point I was making was that both of his goals Saturday were not playing in his normal position and were classic centre forward goals - a little bit of greediness and confidence in a tight space and a classic header that any centre forward would be proud of. I am not saying we should change him but IMO it would be a good option to get a couple of direct wingers in whereby they wouldn't necessarily be a replacement for Billy but give us more weaponry. If Billy was having a poor game on the wing it would be an option instead of substituting him. At the moment we really do not have a winger worth mentioning. In the games I've seen so far, Billy's been deployed as a wide forward, not a winger. Similar role to Hazard, Pedro, Sanchez, Bale etc. Wingers don't exist in a 4-3-3
|
|
|
Post by bluegas on Aug 21, 2017 12:36:52 GMT
The point I was making was that both of his goals Saturday were not playing in his normal position and were classic centre forward goals - a little bit of greediness and confidence in a tight space and a classic header that any centre forward would be proud of. I am not saying we should change him but IMO it would be a good option to get a couple of direct wingers in whereby they wouldn't necessarily be a replacement for Billy but give us more weaponry. If Billy was having a poor game on the wing it would be an option instead of substituting him. At the moment we really do not have a winger worth mentioning. In the games I've seen so far, Billy's been deployed as a wide forward, not a winger. Similar role to Hazard, Pedro, Sanchez, Bale etc. Wingers don't exist in a 4-3-3 Back in the 70's I used to get "Football League Review" (remember it???). In one issue some European coach expounded his formation which he called the "Whirl" where every outfield player could interchange,play anywhere. We ain't there yet but heading that way. Obviously physical attributes come into it. I've never thought of BB as a winger either. But then, was Monkey a conventional winger? Bloody effective though.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 21, 2017 12:48:02 GMT
In the games I've seen so far, Billy's been deployed as a wide forward, not a winger. Similar role to Hazard, Pedro, Sanchez, Bale etc. Wingers don't exist in a 4-3-3 Back in the 70's I used to get "Football League Review" (remember it???). In one issue some European coach expounded his formation which he called the "Whirl" where every outfield player could interchange,play anywhere. We ain't there yet but heading that way. Obviously physical attributes come into it. I've never thought of BB as a winger either. But then, was Monkey a conventional winger? Bloody effective though. I think its a result of players being so fit now, the 'old' 4-4-2 positions are becoming increasingly irrelevent. Even centre-backs are capable of pushing forward and getting back without being knackered. Players can play wide midfield, attacking midfield, wing, and supporting forward at the same time! Really, Billy and the others I mentioned play closer to the old inside forward position, than anything else.
Fans often take a while to adapt to changes like this though, which is why will still hear of players being 'wingers', when wingers haven't existed since the days of Stanley Matthews. We still call players centre-halves and full backs, which is terminology from the 30's!
|
|
|
Post by bluegas on Aug 21, 2017 15:31:40 GMT
Back in the 70's I used to get "Football League Review" (remember it???). In one issue some European coach expounded his formation which he called the "Whirl" where every outfield player could interchange,play anywhere. We ain't there yet but heading that way. Obviously physical attributes come into it. I've never thought of BB as a winger either. But then, was Monkey a conventional winger? Bloody effective though. I think its a result of players being so fit now, the 'old' 4-4-2 positions are becoming increasingly irrelevent. Even centre-backs are capable of pushing forward and getting back without being knackered. Players can play wide midfield, attacking midfield, wing, and supporting forward at the same time! Really, Billy and the others I mentioned play closer to the old inside forward position, than anything else.
Fans often take a while to adapt to changes like this though, which is why will still hear of players being 'wingers', when wingers haven't existed since the days of Stanley Matthews. We still call players centre-halves and full backs, which is terminology from the 30's!
I agree with you completely but I doubt we'll get much support. The only problem I see is our players keeping up with DC's thinking.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Aug 22, 2017 10:07:47 GMT
I love it on here when you can be criticised if you go to no games, just a few games, or watch every game. Everyone is equal. No criticism from me. Just being factual. If you haven't seen a game how can you comment on someone's performance? But then you knew that didn't you. Answers on a post card.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Aug 22, 2017 10:18:13 GMT
Are you really suggesting Lockyer and Brown don't deserve sainthood after everything they have given to our club. Any criticism of these two is pretty unnecessary and unfounded. They both were excellent Saturday. Good win good 3 points good report Steve. Not at all. But currently they have been below par. Locks for instance gave the ball away continually in the first 20 mins or so. Agreed he got better as the game went on. You also said good report Steve. And I agree. But have another look at what he said about Locks and Browner. I agree totally with those assessments.
|
|