Tipps69 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 @Davefevs It's a very question to answer mate because there are so many variables. Are Matthews, Tammy, Taylor, Smith & GO'N fit? Are they fit enough to start or would they be a risk? Who's done what at training & during the U23's? What a starting eleven would look like if all of the above are fit & by that I mean match fit, not just their hamstring injury isn't such a worry fit, is different to what a team would be now with the likelihood being that GO'N, Smith & Matthews are very unlikely to be match fit, so can you / should you risk them. And has been well documented, I haven't been in a position to actually see the players perform so knowing who's in or out of form is something I'm not really qualified to comment on but if I had to pick a side, I would go with as few changes as possible, so...... Gk-Geifer Rb-Matthews (fitness allowing) Lb-Golbourne Cb-Wright Cb-Flint Rm-Cotterill Lm-Bryan Cm-Hegeler Cm-Brownhill St-Abraham St-Djuric Dependant on injuries, obviously the Rb spot is a major worry, am I right in thinking that Bailey Wright has played at Rb before? If TA is out I'd play Taylor but I think Djuric should start & that would allow him to take the physical side of the game off of TA & allow him to do what he does best which is get into position to score rather than fighting for the ball away from inside the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 @Tipps69 I think we know Little is out and I was assuming Tammy is too. We've got to assume that Matthews is fit as he was on bench on Tuesday....surely his overall fitness hasn't gone down in 8 days....I accept he's not match fit though. I've gone for experience, him over Vyner, O'Neil over Brownhill. Experience is no guarantee, sometimes carefree of youth and inexperience works. You cant consider playing Wright at RB, because you said I can't have Magnüsson at LB. So there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 48 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Golbourne isn't a 'bomber' either. I've been a big supporter of Scott all season, but he's out of form, funnily enough, I think it's since Wright started playing. It's all a bit of a dilemma. Magnüsson is a far better passer of the ball, and more comfortable on it than Golbourne. That's why I'd play him Wednesday. LJ won't so it won't become a problem Personally I reckon he'll go 3 at the back. Would I? Nope. No I get you but I think when Scott finds himself forward he's a bit more comfortable than Hordor would be. I think Hordor is more like a CB for Iceland when he plays there. He's a good enough footballer to do it but he's not athletic enough for this league for LB I don't think. If our aim is to have a back 4 of just defenders and counter attack it might work but that doesn't seem to be our aim. I think our starting XI should be mostly what finished at Leeds but not that set up(not really a recognised formation at the end). Mine would be something like this: Giefer Vyner. Flint. Wright. Golbourne Cotterill. Brownhill. Hegeler. COD Taylor/Abraham. Djuric I wouldn't mind seeing Joe at LB(has someone to help him when he gets forward) or at CM for Brownhill there. I like Brownhill but feels he's a safe option. Won't do anything wrong but won't add too much(he'll try and push forward but inside 25 yards hasn't done enough yet and he's not strong in the tackle). So could go Joe there. Think 4-4-2 works with Matty T as he'll link up with the midfielders as does Djuric. Could give Flint a rest I guess but he's useful in most games we'll be playing. Guess it depends on match ups. Weve got a lot of strong choices but none that stand out and that has been our problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talk Of The Town Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 If we're playing 2 central midfielders then No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipps69 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 10 minutes ago, Davefevs said: @Tipps69 I think we know Little is out and I was assuming Tammy is too. We've got to assume that Matthews is fit as he was on bench on Tuesday....surely his overall fitness hasn't gone down in 8 days....I accept he's not match fit though. I've gone for experience, him over Vyner, O'Neil over Brownhill. Experience is no guarantee, sometimes carefree of youth and inexperience works. You cant consider playing Wright at RB, because you said I can't have Magnüsson at LB. So there! I was only suggesting on the back of him maybe having played there at this level for Preston. Maybe one of our Preston visitors could confirm or deny this? @pnefcok (didn't realise there was so many of them when I typed @ pne there are loads of them. As I said, I have to go largely on other fans say so & most have said Hegeler & Brownhill have done okay in the centre of the park. There are obviously numerous options available with so many players in the squad so picking an eleven nowadays isn't as easy as it was at the start of last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 6 minutes ago, Tipps69 said: I was only suggesting on the back of him maybe having played there at this level for Preston. Maybe one of our Preston visitors could confirm or deny this? @pnefcok (didn't realise there was so many of them when I typed @ pne there are loads of them. As I said, I have to go largely on other fans say so & most have said Hegeler & Brownhill have done okay in the centre of the park. There are obviously numerous options available with so many players in the squad so picking an eleven nowadays isn't as easy as it was at the start of last season. Yes, he has played RB, but it's not his natural position. Funnily enough there's a poster on here who says Magnusson is a LB! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipps69 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 6 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Yes, he has played RB, but it's not his natural position. Funnily enough there's a poster on here who says Magnusson is a LB! But as things stand we have Golbourne & Bryan who have played LB predominantly throughout their careers. As far as RB goes, our options are Matthews who has been injured, ill or poor throughout the season or Vyner who is most definitely not a RB!! So if it comes down to Vyner or Wright to play RB, I'd go Wright all day long & HM can come back in alongside Flint. In all honesty, this is make or break for Matthews, if he's unable to play now, when we're desperate for a RB, I'd send him back to Sunderland & terminate his loan with us because he's been a complete waste of wages at the very least!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Tipps69 said: But as things stand we have Golbourne & Bryan who have played LB predominantly throughout their careers. As far as RB goes, our options are Matthews who has been injured, ill or poor throughout the season or Vyner who is most definitely not a RB!! So if it comes down to Vyner or Wright to play RB, I'd go Wright all day long & HM can come back in alongside Flint. In all honesty, this is make or break for Matthews, if he's unable to play now, when we're desperate for a RB, I'd send him back to Sunderland & terminate his loan with us because he's been a complete waste of wages at the very least!! We have problems at full-back don't we? We have no consistent Wing-backs, do we? How has it got to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipps69 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Davefevs said: We have problems at full-back don't we? We have no consistent Wing-backs, do we? How has it got to this? Wing-backs, I'd like to think DC & JB could but it's a big COULD & like I said earlier, I wouldn't over complicate things & I'd go back to basics, to how everyone knows how to play it, so you'd know exactly where everyone should be. So any flicks or one touch passes are going in the general direction of the player that should be in that position. I'm making a bit of a tit of myself trying to explain it over text but if Djuric wins a header for a flick-on he has a rough idea that TA or MT is advanced of him to chase the flick-on down or get on the end of or flick to our right wing should be in the area DC should be in rather than having players floating (LT) and not knowing where they actually are as they have gone where they want to go instead of where they should be. (If you get my drift)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 29 minutes ago, Davefevs said: We have problems at full-back don't we? We have no consistent Wing-backs, do we? How has it got to this? 18 minutes ago, Tipps69 said: Wing-backs, I'd like to think DC & JB could but it's a big COULD & like I said earlier, I wouldn't over complicate things & I'd go back to basics, to how everyone knows how to play it, so you'd know exactly where everyone should be. So any flicks or one touch passes are going in the general direction of the player that should be in that position. I'm making a bit of a tit of myself trying to explain it over text but if Djuric wins a header for a flick-on he has a rough idea that TA or MT is advanced of him to chase the flick-on down or get on the end of or flick to our right wing should be in the area DC should be in rather than having players floating (LT) and not knowing where they actually are as they have gone where they want to go instead of where they should be. (If you get my drift)? I do agree to a large degree with Tipps on this - Think we could , certainly at home, get away with DC and JB as wing backs , but that means going to 3/5 at the back, and changing again Im with you Dave in that , as I said yesterday , I can see him going to 3/5 at the back Only thing Id add is if it worked DC & JB could be very potent and LJ may stumble on a (temp) get out of jail card by way of fate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 @Tipps69 JB is a natural LWB. Unfortunately at Championship level he hasn't been consistent. DC is a RM/RW. I think we have seen a lot of what we've been missing down our right side of attack, and to play him as RWB would take away the positives he's built up. Pegs and holes! You're being inconsistent in your rationale....you sure you're not LJ in disguise? I get your Djuric and partner notion, that's fine. Centre forward partnerships are built on players towing each other around the pitch. Imagine them being connecting by a 10 metre bungee rope, that extends, but wants to pull them back together, they should rarely be too far apart, whilst accepting one might stay central whilst the other runs the channel. In your Djuric comment, a flick to the right wing, ends up at their LB's feet because you've decided to play DC at RWB, and his starting position will be much deeper! Agree that the random element of Tomlin is not helpful. Taylor's movement in his brief career has got me to a position where Tomlin is no longer in my 18. I never thought I'd say that. In a team full of confidence, I'd have a different view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 5 minutes ago, Davefevs said: @Tipps69 JB is a natural LWB. Unfortunately at Championship level he hasn't been consistent. DC is a RM/RW. I think we have seen a lot of what we've been missing down our right side of attack, and to play him as RWB would take away the positives he's built up. Pegs and holes! You're being inconsistent in your rationale....you sure you're not LJ in disguise? I stand to be corrected but I'm sure DC has filled in at RWB for Birmingham Tbf he has all the attributes (Save a lack of / limited experience in the role - positioning vital in that role ) to be able to play there edit On a different note - didn't realise he'd been so injury prone this season He continued as a regular in the side until a hamstring injury sustained in early October kept him out for three weeks,[33] and on his next start, in early November at home to Blackburn Rovers, he damaged a knee.[34] Although the knee recovered and he was expected to be available for the visit to Sheffield Wednesday on 26 December, manager Gary Rowett chose not to risk him because of tightness in his hamstring.[35] Cotterill returned to the side for the FA Cup match on 9 January, came off at half-time with a tight hamstring,[36] and did not reappear for another five weeks, as a late substitute in the goalless draw at Rotherham United.[37] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londoner Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 Brownhill getting better and better. Dropping him wpuld be thpical bristol city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 8 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said: I do agree to a large degree with Tipps on this - Think we could , certainly at home, get away with DC and JB as wing backs , but that means going to 3/5 at the back, and changing again Im with you Dave in that , as I said yesterday , I can see him going to 3/5 at the back Only thing Id add is if it worked DC & JB could be very potent and LJ may stumble on a (temp) get out of jail card by way of fate You're both right though, he might stumble upon DC being great at RWB. Elliott Bennett adapted well. I really liked him, shame Blackburn offered more money than us last January - he'd almost signed on the dotted line when the chance to re-join Lambert came up last minute. It is another change BBSB, but if DC could play there, I'd like a back 3 of BW, AF & HM. I'd go with a flat 3 in midfield, where there is flexibility to rotate who goes forward, as long as one stays. So we now go: FB, BW, AF & HM DC, JB, JH, GO, JB MD, MT I'm not buying a no10 at the mo', BR played in a two early season, he can certainly be in a three. Pack can come in too when needed. I actually like 532/352, we played it a lot when I played....but we always had decent WBs. We sometimes played 523, that way our side forwards (all rotating across the front line) covered the fullbacks when we didn't have the ball, meaning our Wingbacks didn't get doubled up on. At the end of the day, it's about our players (whoever is picked and in whatever formation) winning their battles, playing somewhere near what we know they're capable of....then we starting winning. It isn't all LJs fault, even if I'm not a fan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Londoner said: Brownhill getting better and better. Dropping him wpuld be thpical bristol city. He is, but influencing games less the more the game goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 9 minutes ago, Davefevs said: You're both right though, he might stumble upon DC being great at RWB. Elliott Bennett adapted well. I really liked him, shame Blackburn offered more money than us last January - he'd almost signed on the dotted line when the chance to re-join Lambert came up last minute. It is another change BBSB, but if DC could play there, I'd like a back 3 of BW, AF & HM. I'd go with a flat 3 in midfield, where there is flexibility to rotate who goes forward, as long as one stays. So we now go: FB, BW, AF & HM DC, JB, JH, GO, JB MD, MT I'm not buying a no10 at the mo', BR played in a two early season, he can certainly be in a three. Pack can come in too when needed. I actually like 532/352, we played it a lot when I played....but we always had decent WBs. We sometimes played 523, that way our side forwards (all rotating across the front line) covered the fullbacks when we didn't have the ball, meaning our Wingbacks didn't get doubled up on. At the end of the day, it's about our players (whoever is picked and in whatever formation) winning their battles, playing somewhere near what we know they're capable of....then we starting winning. It isn't all LJs fault, even if I'm not a fan! Depending on Matthews fitness / attitude - I agree Dave Agree that despite it being another change. , due to the RB problem - I can see that LJ might be forced into a 5-3-2 The other option would be Brownhill at RWB but I think I'd rather go with DC youre side is exactly what I'd be tempted to run with except I may be tempted bring back BR instead of Brownhill , to give us some creativity (Don't expect it - think BR did himself in LJs eyes losing that ball on edge of the box) If we go / have to go with a JB / DC combination we must use them - keep giving them the ball - our two most potent suppliers IMHO JB on bench with a view to telling BR to give everything for an hour (Or I guess the other way round with BR coming on for last 30 or an alternative if we want to stay 'solid') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 Don't disagree with any of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipps69 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 26 minutes ago, Davefevs said: @Tipps69 JB is a natural LWB. Unfortunately at Championship level he hasn't been consistent. DC is a RM/RW. I think we have seen a lot of what we've been missing down our right side of attack, and to play him as RWB would take away the positives he's built up. Pegs and holes! You're being inconsistent in your rationale....you sure you're not LJ in disguise? I get your Djuric and partner notion, that's fine. Centre forward partnerships are built on players towing each other around the pitch. Imagine them being connecting by a 10 metre bungee rope, that extends, but wants to pull them back together, they should rarely be too far apart, whilst accepting one might stay central whilst the other runs the channel. In your Djuric comment, a flick to the right wing, ends up at their LB's feet because you've decided to play DC at RWB, and his starting position will be much deeper! Agree that the random element of Tomlin is not helpful. Taylor's movement in his brief career has got me to a position where Tomlin is no longer in my 18. I never thought I'd say that. In a team full of confidence, I'd have a different view. And that's what I mean, there are so many variables, it's impossible to second guess what we will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 So this week, it's been Matthews, GoN, Engval, and Reid. Are we going to get threads every week regarding which players haven't made the first 11 or bench? Probably...it's otib. Bring Vyner and FF back I say...just for the novelty and hell of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipps69 Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 @Davefevs You know we're going to end up discussing this lineup & formation for the rest of the week, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 15 minutes ago, spudski said: So this week, it's been Matthews, GoN, Engval, and Reid. Are we going to get threads every week regarding which players haven't made the first 11 or bench? Probably...it's otib. Bring Vyner and FF back I say...just for the novelty and hell of it. You should start a new thread if you feel like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 12 minutes ago, Tipps69 said: @Davefevs You know we're going to end up discussing this lineup & formation for the rest of the week, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 I posted on another forum that, IMHO, it should be Hegeler / Pack with Josh / GON / Bobby alongside. Jens and Marlon are too similar and it just didn't work against Rotherham plus the other 3 can play a more advanced role. GON has the experience to do any role while the other 2 have the legs to get forward and support and get back when needed. Unfortunately, due to his reluctance to join the defensive effort when we haven't got the ball, Tommo would be a sub at best, he left Little horribly exposed at times against Wednesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie BCFC Posted February 19, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 5 minutes ago, 8menhadadream said: I posted on another forum that, IMHO, it should be Hegeler / Pack with Josh / GON / Bobby alongside. Jens and Marlon are too similar and it just didn't work against Rotherham and the other 3 can play a more advanced role. GOn has the experience to do any role while the other 2 have the legs to get forward and support and get back when needed. Unfortunately, due to his reluctance to join the defensive effort when we haven't got the ball, Tommo would be a sub at best, he left Little horribly exposed at times against Wednesday. I personally think Pack will be sold in the summer along with Korey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 Just now, Flint says No said: I personally think Pack will be sold in the summer along with Korey. I think you're right FsN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 hour ago, spudski said: So this week, it's been Matthews, GoN, Engval, and Reid. Are we going to get threads every week regarding which players haven't made the first 11 or bench? Probably...it's otib. Bring Vyner and FF back I say...just for the novelty and hell of it. I thought it turned into an interesting mini debate tbh Spud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, BobBobSuperBob said: I thought it turned into an interesting mini debate tbh Spud Spud is gutted he wasn't involved that's all I'm enjoying the JJ thread too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairman Mao Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 Good player, good movement, good eye for the forward ball, finds space well. i really like Reid, he's probably by favourite player. Would always be happy to see him in the squad which, sadly, he hasn't since in the league for some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 6 hours ago, TheCulturalBomb said: I quite like the idea of a 433, Little-Wright-Magnusson-Bryan Reid-Hegeler-Brownhill Coterill-Abraham-Taylor Little and Tammy are injured for the foreseeable future... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 16 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Little and Tammy are injured for the foreseeable future... What is the latest official news on Tammy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.