|
Post by onepara on Aug 17, 2020 19:51:00 GMT
Will vary Don't see same XI starting back to back very often. All the players I listed above could legitimately see themselves as regular starters. Campbell is the only one with real pace. McClean was player of the season. Clucas was top scorer. Powell is a favourite of the manager and the crowd. Fletcher is the target man/poacher we've needed. And MON often talks about Allen as being arguably one of his best players. Add a good right-winger, and two have to be left out. Campbell has no pace. When did he last go past a player?
|
|
|
Post by neddy on Aug 17, 2020 19:53:43 GMT
Campbell looked pretty pacy on the 4th goal at Forest...
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2020 20:54:34 GMT
The answer is Verlinden surely to fuck? I'm not sure it is if were serious about pushing for top 6. I honestly thought he looked lightweight in the appearances he made before injury. Just cant see him being the answer as first choice in a 2 game a week league at the moment. As he physically develops maybe. But for now he's an impact from the bench at most. Plus he's recovering from a serious injury and this can take many players 12 months to really get over it if at all. He's a winger, he doesn't need to physically develop
|
|
|
Post by gingerninja on Aug 17, 2020 21:00:45 GMT
But so did Ince for the last Forest goal.
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Aug 17, 2020 21:04:27 GMT
I see Malik Wilks as being a more exciting option. He’s a right sided wide forward winger. I like the look of the lad also. Bit of dog's home about him too. While he's noted widely as a right winger, I think his 'official' preference is the left ? (But stand to be corrected.) Clearly he can also play on the right and so, arguably, this makes him an even better option for me.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2020 21:10:12 GMT
One issue, where's Ince going?
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Aug 17, 2020 21:12:08 GMT
I'm not sure it is if were serious about pushing for top 6. I honestly thought he looked lightweight in the appearances he made before injury. Just cant see him being the answer as first choice in a 2 game a week league at the moment. As he physically develops maybe. But for now he's an impact from the bench at most. Plus he's recovering from a serious injury and this can take many players 12 months to really get over it if at all. He's a winger, he doesn't need to physically develop Somebody should have told Adama Traore
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Aug 17, 2020 21:13:34 GMT
One issue, where's Ince going? Will he fit into the Pottermus costume?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2020 21:14:43 GMT
He's a winger, he doesn't need to physically develop Somebody should have told Adama Traore I mean you've gone for the very very extreme. Physicality isn't a necesity for a winger. We had it in Arnie but then Ethers, Pennant and Shaq weren't physical and they didn't need to be. And it's only these last 18 months that Traore has actually developed any sort of end product. That's the real thing you need.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Aug 17, 2020 21:15:38 GMT
Somebody should have told Adama Traore I mean you've gone for the very very extreme. Physicality isn't a necesity for a winger. We had it in Arnie but then Ethers, Pennant and Shaq weren't physical and they didn't need to be. And it's only these last 18 months that Traore has actually developed any sort of end product. That's the real thing you need. I’m sorry it was a joke🙄
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2020 21:16:51 GMT
I mean you've gone for the very very extreme. Physicality isn't a necesity for a winger. We had it in Arnie but then Ethers, Pennant and Shaq weren't physical and they didn't need to be. And it's only these last 18 months that Traore has actually developed any sort of end product. That's the real thing you need. I’m sorry it was a joke🙄 Oh sorry. ha ha ha h
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 17, 2020 21:18:31 GMT
Can someone explain to me what formation we are going to play if we use wingers? 433 with wingers is hopeless - it leaves the central striker isolated. That's how Rowett tried to play with McClean and Ince wide and we never looked like scoring. O'Neill's 433 seems to involve inside forwards - like Brentford. Inverted wingers might work but if that's the way we are going I see Afobe and Campbell doing a better job. The other formation O'Neill has favoured is 532 which means wingbacks but then do you go for an offensive defender (such as Tymon) or a winger who can track back (like McClean). Traditional wingers work best in a 442 - but O'Neill hasn't shown the slightest inclination to play it There are no end of threads on here claiming we need wingers but no-one has explained why and how we are going to shape up if we get one. 4-2-3-1 works enough with wingers but you are right the other formations he's been trying don't really scream out wingers, I think it would be a good idea to keep a few in the squad so we can rotate when needed between the two formations that have worked so far, we don't have the pace or the players for 4-3-3 so hopefully that and Afobe anywhere near wide is a distant memory
|
|
|
Post by george2again on Aug 17, 2020 21:44:18 GMT
All the players I listed above could legitimately see themselves as regular starters. Campbell is the only one with real pace. McClean was player of the season. Clucas was top scorer. Powell is a favourite of the manager and the crowd. Fletcher is the target man/poacher we've needed. And MON often talks about Allen as being arguably one of his best players. Add a good right-winger, and two have to be left out. Campbell has no pace. When did he last go past a player? Agreed it’s a myth Campbell has pace. Not slow but no where near net heeled. We need some real pace in this side.
|
|
|
Post by george2again on Aug 17, 2020 21:45:20 GMT
Campbell has no pace. When did he last go past a player? Agreed it’s a myth Campbell has pace. Not slow but no where near jet heeled. We need some real pace in this side.
|
|
|
Post by datguy on Aug 17, 2020 22:16:55 GMT
Is Sammy Ameobi going free?
I think there's worse players to bring in. Thought he was one of the only players doing owt last game of the season for Forest. Tall fucker but pacey.
|
|
|
Post by Bojan Mackey on Aug 17, 2020 22:42:17 GMT
Is Sammy Ameobi going free? I think there's worse players to bring in. Thought he was one of the only players doing owt last game of the season for Forest. Tall fucker but pacey. If I ran a pub side, and only 10 players showed up for a game, and my choice for the 11th player was between Fat Baz who’s still pissed from the night before, has a kit three sizes too small and who’s breakfast consists of a fag and a Carling, and Sammy Ameobi, I’d be asking Baz how quickly he could get his boots on.
|
|
|
Post by datguy on Aug 17, 2020 22:45:55 GMT
Is Sammy Ameobi going free? I think there's worse players to bring in. Thought he was one of the only players doing owt last game of the season for Forest. Tall fucker but pacey. If I ran a pub side, and only 10 players showed up for a game, and my choice for the 11th player was between Fat Baz who’s still pissed from the night before, has a kit three sizes too small and who’s breakfast consists of a fag and a Carling, and Sammy Ameobi, I’d be asking Baz how quickly he could get his boots on. But does Fat Baz have the claim to fame of being the younger brother of Shola?
|
|
|
Post by Championship Potter on Aug 17, 2020 22:46:24 GMT
All the players I listed above could legitimately see themselves as regular starters. Campbell is the only one with real pace. McClean was player of the season. Clucas was top scorer. Powell is a favourite of the manager and the crowd. Fletcher is the target man/poacher we've needed. And MON often talks about Allen as being arguably one of his best players. Add a good right-winger, and two have to be left out. With a game every few days it won't be an issue Clucas, Allen, Fletcher, McClean and Mikel are all 30 plus too. Realistically they’re going to need rotating and likely to pick up a few injuries.
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Aug 18, 2020 7:10:33 GMT
Somebody should have told Adama Traore I mean you've gone for the very very extreme. Physicality isn't a necesity for a winger. We had it in Arnie but then Ethers, Pennant and Shaq weren't physical and they didn't need to be. And it's only these last 18 months that Traore has actually developed any sort of end product. That's the real thing you need. A certain amount of upper body strength is necessary for a winger. You talk about Shaq- the guy might have been small but he was built like a brick shithouse.Ethers and Pennant weren't, but neither were they easy to brush off the ball. Both were pretty wiry, reasonably strong without necessarily looking like they could go to the gym and start bench pressing massive fuck off weights. Most famous example of a wide player like this is Raheem Sterling. He looks like a gentle breeze would blow him over, but he's incredibly difficult to knock off the ball. The game is now more physical than it's ever been. Verlinden isn't the tallest, so he'll need to show he can't be pushed off the ball easily if he wants to stake a claim.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Aug 18, 2020 7:17:42 GMT
He's a winger, he doesn't need to physically develop Somebody should have told Adama Traore The obvious training plan should include baby oil usage!
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 18, 2020 7:24:29 GMT
I'm not sure it is if were serious about pushing for top 6. I honestly thought he looked lightweight in the appearances he made before injury. Just cant see him being the answer as first choice in a 2 game a week league at the moment. As he physically develops maybe. But for now he's an impact from the bench at most. Plus he's recovering from a serious injury and this can take many players 12 months to really get over it if at all. He's a winger, he doesn't need to physically develop If he doesn't physically develop he's going to spend most of his short career recovering from injury.
|
|
|
Post by bridgnorthstokie on Aug 18, 2020 7:26:09 GMT
I'm not sure it is if were serious about pushing for top 6. I honestly thought he looked lightweight in the appearances he made before injury. Just cant see him being the answer as first choice in a 2 game a week league at the moment. As he physically develops maybe. But for now he's an impact from the bench at most. Plus he's recovering from a serious injury and this can take many players 12 months to really get over it if at all. He's a winger, he doesn't need to physically physically...unb] Then the full backs will love playing against him..a slight shoulder nudge and the threat is over. Of course he needs to develop physically...unbelievable Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 18, 2020 7:48:46 GMT
Can someone explain to me what formation we are going to play if we use wingers? 433 with wingers is hopeless - it leaves the central striker isolated. That's how Rowett tried to play with McClean and Ince wide and we never looked like scoring. O'Neill's 433 seems to involve inside forwards - like Brentford. Inverted wingers might work but if that's the way we are going I see Afobe and Campbell doing a better job. The other formation O'Neill has favoured is 532 which means wingbacks but then do you go for an offensive defender (such as Tymon) or a winger who can track back (like McClean). Traditional wingers work best in a 442 - but O'Neill hasn't shown the slightest inclination to play it There are no end of threads on here claiming we need wingers but no-one has explained why and how we are going to shape up if we get one. 4-2-3-1 works enough with wingers but you are right the other formations he's been trying don't really scream out wingers, I think it would be a good idea to keep a few in the squad so we can rotate when needed between the two formations that have worked so far, we don't have the pace or the players for 4-3-3 so hopefully that and Afobe anywhere near wide is a distant memory At last an answer that actually makes sense! But have we actually played that formation and what players would we use? From what we have Fletcher up front, McClean and Ince wide (either that or the mythical new wingers), Powell centre and Mikel and Clucas sitting. Verlindon could do a job instead of McClean but it would be a complete waste to hang the likes of Campbell or Afobe out wide as they aren't really wingers and it would negate what they do best - bearing down on goal and scoring. That formation is way better than a 433 with wingers but it still leaves the striker a bit isolated - 442 is still the formation for me that gets the best out of old school wingers. I honestly think the call for wingers is misplaced. I think O'Neill is going to go for either a tucked in 433 with the attacking width provided by the fullback or 532 with the attacking width provided by wing backs. Change this thread title to "Wing backs/Attacking Fullbacks" and I'm with it. I just don't think we need wingers because they don't have a role in the formations O'Neill prefers and I can't see him buying a player that doesn't fit into his plans.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 18, 2020 8:39:53 GMT
4-2-3-1 works enough with wingers but you are right the other formations he's been trying don't really scream out wingers, I think it would be a good idea to keep a few in the squad so we can rotate when needed between the two formations that have worked so far, we don't have the pace or the players for 4-3-3 so hopefully that and Afobe anywhere near wide is a distant memory At last an answer that actually makes sense! But have we actually played that formation and what players would we use? From what we have Fletcher up front, McClean and Ince wide (either that or the mythical new wingers), Powell centre and Mikel and Clucas sitting. Verlindon could do a job instead of McClean but it would be a complete waste to hang the likes of Campbell or Afobe out wide as they aren't really wingers and it would negate what they do best - bearing down on goal and scoring. That formation is way better than a 433 with wingers but it still leaves the striker a bit isolated - 442 is still the formation for me that gets the best out of old school wingers. I honestly think the call for wingers is misplaced. I think O'Neill is going to go for either a tucked in 433 with the attacking width provided by the fullback or 532 with the attacking width provided by wing backs. Change this thread title to "Wing backs/Attacking Fullbacks" and I'm with it. I just don't think we need wingers because they don't have a role in the formations O'Neill prefers and I can't see him buying a player that doesn't fit into his plans. Didn't really mean wingers in the chalk-on-the-boots, go-round-the-outside Stanley Matthews sense, although that's pretty much the way McClean operates in any system as he's very much an old-fashioned 4-4-2-style wide man I always just mentally refer to even the wider players in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that way. I'm still expecting another player to come in to challenge Ince/Campbell for the role on the right of the attack. I actually thought it suited Campbell quite well. And his goalscoring record from that role was very good, but can't see MON going in with Tyrese as first pick there. And he must be close to giving up on Ince. And while 5-3-2 is an option, it would probably mean only one of Fox and McClean playing - and wouldn't have thought Fox had signed up for a lot of bench duty if he had other options? MON did say the other day Fox was an option as a left-sided CB in a 3 or at wing-back (although that'd mean McClean on the bench which seems unlikely), but got to think he saw him as a steady left-back in a 4 above all? In fact 'steady' was the first word out of MON's mouth to describe what he'd bring to the team. 3 at the back would mean that more than 1 of our boatload of strikers could start though. If 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 is going to be the regular formation, it is going to be almost impossible to see Afobe get much action at all. How much Afobe figures will be one of the more interesting questions, but as you say, wouldn't have thought he'd really be an option in one of the wider forward roles. If we do bring in another front-line right wing option though, it does have the knock-on effect of really limiting Campbell's minutes there, and make Ince pretty redundant - and if we are largely going with one striker, even Campbell might find himself a bit peripheral to start with
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Aug 18, 2020 8:54:13 GMT
At last an answer that actually makes sense! But have we actually played that formation and what players would we use? From what we have Fletcher up front, McClean and Ince wide (either that or the mythical new wingers), Powell centre and Mikel and Clucas sitting. Verlindon could do a job instead of McClean but it would be a complete waste to hang the likes of Campbell or Afobe out wide as they aren't really wingers and it would negate what they do best - bearing down on goal and scoring. That formation is way better than a 433 with wingers but it still leaves the striker a bit isolated - 442 is still the formation for me that gets the best out of old school wingers. I honestly think the call for wingers is misplaced. I think O'Neill is going to go for either a tucked in 433 with the attacking width provided by the fullback or 532 with the attacking width provided by wing backs. Change this thread title to "Wing backs/Attacking Fullbacks" and I'm with it. I just don't think we need wingers because they don't have a role in the formations O'Neill prefers and I can't see him buying a player that doesn't fit into his plans. Didn't really mean wingers in the chalk-on-the-boots, go-round-the-outside Stanley Matthews sense, although that's pretty much the way McClean operates in any system as he's very much an old-fashioned 4-4-2-style wide man I always just mentally refer to even the wider players in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that way. I'm still expecting another player to come in to challenge Ince/Campbell for the role on the right of the attack. I actually thought it suited Campbell quite well. And his goalscoring record from that role was very good, but can't see MON going in with Tyrese as first pick there. And he must be close to giving up on Ince. And while 5-3-2 is an option, it would probably mean only one of Fox and McClean playing - and wouldn't have thought Fox had signed up for a lot of bench duty if he had other options? MON did say the other day Fox was an option as a left-sided CB in a 3 or at wing-back (although that'd mean McClean on the bench which seems unlikely), but got to think he saw him as a steady left-back in a 4 above all? In fact 'steady' was the first word out of MON's mouth to describe what he'd bring to the team. 3 at the back would mean that more than 1 of our boatload of strikers could start though. If 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 is going to be the regular formation, it is going to be almost impossible to see Afobe get much action at all. How much Afobe figures will be one of the more interesting questions, but as you say, wouldn't have thought he'd really be an option in one of the wider forward roles. If we do bring in another front-line right wing option though, it does have the knock-on effect of really limiting Campbell's minutes there, and make Ince pretty redundant - and if we are largely going with one striker, even Campbell might find himself a bit peripheral to start with MON loves 4-3-3 with inverted wide men and 2 midfielders pushing on and one holding. As this evolved through lockdown he had McClean and Campbell playing close to Vokes for knockdowns off long balls. In that system Afobe could play on the left with Clucas covering and Campbell/Powell on the right. Then you can do direct to Fletcher for over the top. A winger or forward with pace that could play wide would be useful to mix it up and for chasing games
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 18, 2020 9:05:43 GMT
Didn't really mean wingers in the chalk-on-the-boots, go-round-the-outside Stanley Matthews sense, although that's pretty much the way McClean operates in any system as he's very much an old-fashioned 4-4-2-style wide man I always just mentally refer to even the wider players in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that way. I'm still expecting another player to come in to challenge Ince/Campbell for the role on the right of the attack. I actually thought it suited Campbell quite well. And his goalscoring record from that role was very good, but can't see MON going in with Tyrese as first pick there. And he must be close to giving up on Ince. And while 5-3-2 is an option, it would probably mean only one of Fox and McClean playing - and wouldn't have thought Fox had signed up for a lot of bench duty if he had other options? MON did say the other day Fox was an option as a left-sided CB in a 3 or at wing-back (although that'd mean McClean on the bench which seems unlikely), but got to think he saw him as a steady left-back in a 4 above all? In fact 'steady' was the first word out of MON's mouth to describe what he'd bring to the team. 3 at the back would mean that more than 1 of our boatload of strikers could start though. If 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 is going to be the regular formation, it is going to be almost impossible to see Afobe get much action at all. How much Afobe figures will be one of the more interesting questions, but as you say, wouldn't have thought he'd really be an option in one of the wider forward roles. If we do bring in another front-line right wing option though, it does have the knock-on effect of really limiting Campbell's minutes there, and make Ince pretty redundant - and if we are largely going with one striker, even Campbell might find himself a bit peripheral to start with MON loves 4-3-3 with inverted wide men and 2 midfielders pushing on and one holding. As this evolved through lockdown he had McClean and Campbell playing close to Vokes for knockdowns off long balls. In that system Afobe could play on the left with Clucas covering and Campbell/Powell on the right. Then you can do direct to Fletcher for over the top. A winger or forward with pace that could play wide would be useful to mix it up and for chasing games Interesting option, but can't help feeling Benik may end up looking a bit lost there. And can't see MON ever starting Afobe ahead of McClean - but maybe we'll get more a clue of what his thinking is in the friendlies.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 18, 2020 9:28:52 GMT
At last an answer that actually makes sense! But have we actually played that formation and what players would we use? From what we have Fletcher up front, McClean and Ince wide (either that or the mythical new wingers), Powell centre and Mikel and Clucas sitting. Verlindon could do a job instead of McClean but it would be a complete waste to hang the likes of Campbell or Afobe out wide as they aren't really wingers and it would negate what they do best - bearing down on goal and scoring. That formation is way better than a 433 with wingers but it still leaves the striker a bit isolated - 442 is still the formation for me that gets the best out of old school wingers. I honestly think the call for wingers is misplaced. I think O'Neill is going to go for either a tucked in 433 with the attacking width provided by the fullback or 532 with the attacking width provided by wing backs. Change this thread title to "Wing backs/Attacking Fullbacks" and I'm with it. I just don't think we need wingers because they don't have a role in the formations O'Neill prefers and I can't see him buying a player that doesn't fit into his plans. Didn't really mean wingers in the chalk-on-the-boots, go-round-the-outside Stanley Matthews sense, although that's pretty much the way McClean operates in any system as he's very much an old-fashioned 4-4-2-style wide man I always just mentally refer to even the wider players in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that way. I'm still expecting another player to come in to challenge Ince/Campbell for the role on the right of the attack. I actually thought it suited Campbell quite well. And his goalscoring record from that role was very good, but can't see MON going in with Tyrese as first pick there. And he must be close to giving up on Ince. And while 5-3-2 is an option, it would probably mean only one of Fox and McClean playing - and wouldn't have thought Fox had signed up for a lot of bench duty if he had other options? MON did say the other day Fox was an option as a left-sided CB in a 3 or at wing-back (although that'd mean McClean on the bench which seems unlikely), but got to think he saw him as a steady left-back in a 4 above all? In fact 'steady' was the first word out of MON's mouth to describe what he'd bring to the team. 3 at the back would mean that more than 1 of our boatload of strikers could start though. If 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 is going to be the regular formation, it is going to be almost impossible to see Afobe get much action at all. How much Afobe figures will be one of the more interesting questions, but as you say, wouldn't have thought he'd really be an option in one of the wider forward roles. If we do bring in another front-line right wing option though, it does have the knock-on effect of really limiting Campbell's minutes there, and make Ince pretty redundant - and if we are largely going with one striker, even Campbell might find himself a bit peripheral to start with I get where you are coming from with this - I started watching football in the 70s and for me winger still means someone who goes outside the fullbacks to put in crosses. If you are talking about tucked in wide men in a front three I get where you are coming from - but I think a lot of the replies are from people talking about old school wingers. You are also right in that if we do bring in that sort of player it could marginalise players like Afobe, Campbell, McClean and Ince. Given that Campbell and McClean have played well in those roles, Ince has the potential but hasn't lived up to it and Afobe could be an interesting prospect it's going to be a big ask to get someone better and shift out one or more of the above before the season starts. Ince probably looks the most vulnerable. I think the attacking width is going to be provided by the wingbacks/fullbacks. We have good options there in McClean, Fox and Tymon but are light on the right. Rather than going for an attacking player - I think we could do a lot worse than what we have already - I'd be looking to get in a pacey right back/wingback to provide the attacking width. Call them a defensive winger and we're good....
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 18, 2020 11:06:22 GMT
4-2-3-1 works enough with wingers but you are right the other formations he's been trying don't really scream out wingers, I think it would be a good idea to keep a few in the squad so we can rotate when needed between the two formations that have worked so far, we don't have the pace or the players for 4-3-3 so hopefully that and Afobe anywhere near wide is a distant memory At last an answer that actually makes sense! But have we actually played that formation and what players would we use? From what we have Fletcher up front, McClean and Ince wide (either that or the mythical new wingers), Powell centre and Mikel and Clucas sitting. Verlindon could do a job instead of McClean but it would be a complete waste to hang the likes of Campbell or Afobe out wide as they aren't really wingers and it would negate what they do best - bearing down on goal and scoring. That formation is way better than a 433 with wingers but it still leaves the striker a bit isolated - 442 is still the formation for me that gets the best out of old school wingers. I honestly think the call for wingers is misplaced. I think O'Neill is going to go for either a tucked in 433 with the attacking width provided by the fullback or 532 with the attacking width provided by wing backs. Change this thread title to "Wing backs/Attacking Fullbacks" and I'm with it. I just don't think we need wingers because they don't have a role in the formations O'Neill prefers and I can't see him buying a player that doesn't fit into his plans. We played it more before the break than after and it's pretty much what you've said with Clucas with Allen/Cousins next to him and Powell infront and whoiever out wide but I can't see us signing new wingers if it isn't going to be our go to formation, given our lack of funds it seems a waste to spend on something that may only be used now and then, if Ince was to leave though then it may be worth getting one in. I think the call for wingers is just people being used to seeing wingers for so long and looking at the squad you'd assume we need at least one in that case. Personally another wing back would make more sense or a foward with pace.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 18, 2020 11:07:52 GMT
Didn't really mean wingers in the chalk-on-the-boots, go-round-the-outside Stanley Matthews sense, although that's pretty much the way McClean operates in any system as he's very much an old-fashioned 4-4-2-style wide man I always just mentally refer to even the wider players in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that way. I'm still expecting another player to come in to challenge Ince/Campbell for the role on the right of the attack. I actually thought it suited Campbell quite well. And his goalscoring record from that role was very good, but can't see MON going in with Tyrese as first pick there. And he must be close to giving up on Ince. And while 5-3-2 is an option, it would probably mean only one of Fox and McClean playing - and wouldn't have thought Fox had signed up for a lot of bench duty if he had other options? MON did say the other day Fox was an option as a left-sided CB in a 3 or at wing-back (although that'd mean McClean on the bench which seems unlikely), but got to think he saw him as a steady left-back in a 4 above all? In fact 'steady' was the first word out of MON's mouth to describe what he'd bring to the team. 3 at the back would mean that more than 1 of our boatload of strikers could start though. If 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 is going to be the regular formation, it is going to be almost impossible to see Afobe get much action at all. How much Afobe figures will be one of the more interesting questions, but as you say, wouldn't have thought he'd really be an option in one of the wider forward roles. If we do bring in another front-line right wing option though, it does have the knock-on effect of really limiting Campbell's minutes there, and make Ince pretty redundant - and if we are largely going with one striker, even Campbell might find himself a bit peripheral to start with MON loves 4-3-3 with inverted wide men and 2 midfielders pushing on and one holding. As this evolved through lockdown he had McClean and Campbell playing close to Vokes for knockdowns off long balls. In that system Afobe could play on the left with Clucas covering and Campbell/Powell on the right. Then you can do direct to Fletcher for over the top. A winger or forward with pace that could play wide would be useful to mix it up and for chasing games This coming from the bloke that said he didn't have a prefered system
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 18, 2020 11:29:58 GMT
|
|