Jump to content
IGNORED

Andy Weimann Any News?


REDOXO

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

If we are playing him in a front two - Matty Taylor is a direct replacement - workmate and energy is comparable also finishing.

I know Andi scored three in one game, but he has missed so many in the last 10 games I would be confident that Taylor is as close a like for like replacement as we could find.

Taylor is a busy, pest of a player, yes, but I wouldn’t liken his energy & work rate to anything like the levels of AW. 

He is going to be a massive loss to our overall team performance, whatever position he’s played in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has to be Pato v Wigan IMO. Change it up for MT or Kasey Palmer as and when if the game dictates. I wouldn`t want to see either starting but both are perfect impact subs.

Baggies on Tuesday is a different thing altogether though. We may have to go a bit more defensive against them and pack the midfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

If we are playing him in a front two - Matty Taylor is a direct replacement - workmate and energy is comparable also finishing.

I know Andi scored three in one game, but he has missed so many in the last 10 games I would be confident that Taylor is as close a like for like replacement as we could find.

finishing? Taylor? ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

The only news on Andi is that Lee still thinks he is a winger.  Play him up top and I can assure you he will score more than 20 goals a season.

Why can't LJ see it?  he was scoring when he came and hit a hat trick at Bramall Lane.

Same at Derby.  Their fans say exactly the same.

I’m fairly sure Andi said he came here cause LJ saw he predominantly as a striker, . Now he started off on fire up top, but from my memory he then went off the boil. So LJ accommodated him in the team by playing him wider. Personally see him as a streaky striker, rather than a consistent goal scorer. But you cannot fault his attitude & work rate, although I’m not convinced he’s a 20 goals a season striker. COYR 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Simon79 said:

I’m fairly sure Andi said he came here cause LJ saw he predominantly as a striker, . Now he started off on fire up top, but from my memory he then went off the boil. So LJ accommodated him in the team by playing him wider. Personally see him as a streaky striker, rather than a consistent goal scorer. But you cannot fault his attitude & work rate, although I’m not convinced he’s a 20 goals a season striker. COYR 

I'd have him up top over FD especially at home as his work rate and movement is 1st class and he showed us he can finish and he isn't that far off are 5million pound striker for GS. Think that's been a major factor at home we set up so negative and been key to dropping silly points as seen against Ipswich we made it far to easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BessexRED said:

Go on...

If true, it's a great shame but Eliasson needs to be starting anyway, this will all but guarantee it.

Where does Eliasson fit in if we go 352?  Or do you see our 532 as a 5221 really, and therefore Eliasson in the forward 2, behind Fam?

Would've thought if 532 then Taylor would be the most obvious choice, possibly Semenyo, possibly Palmer.  If 5221, then several options, but have to have someone prepared to run beyond Fam.

2 hours ago, Simon79 said:

I’m fairly sure Andi said he came here cause LJ saw he predominantly as a striker, . Now he started off on fire up top, but from my memory he then went off the boil. So LJ accommodated him in the team by playing him wider. Personally see him as a streaky striker, rather than a consistent goal scorer. But you cannot fault his attitude & work rate, although I’m not convinced he’s a 20 goals a season striker. COYR 

Yes, and he Re-iterated that in his post-match interview on Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Davefevs said:

Where does Eliasson fit in if we go 352?  Or do you see our 532 as a 5221 really, and therefore Eliasson in the forward 2, behind Fam?

Would've thought if 532 then Taylor would be the most obvious choice, possibly Semenyo, possibly Palmer.  If 5221, then several options, but have to have someone prepared to run beyond Fam.

Yes, and he Re-iterated that in his post-match interview on Saturday.

I see it as a sort of 3-4-3 if you like, similar to Conte’s Chelsea. The wing backs offer the natural width and the two in behind play between that 10 role and wide role depending on where they’re finding joy, so I think Eliasson cutting in off the right would be spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BessexRED said:

I see it as a sort of 3-4-3 if you like, similar to Conte’s Chelsea. The wing backs offer the natural width and the two in behind play between that 10 role and wide role depending on where they’re finding joy, so I think Eliasson cutting in off the right would be spot on.

How do you think we lined up with the ball v Sheffield United.  I only listened on radio, and assumed it was a straight forward 352/532 (Pack, Smith Brownhill - Weimann, Diedhiou), yet it sounded like Brownhill was given licence to get forward, so I thought it might be more 5212 (like Cotts’s team), only to view whoscored and Stats Zone with a 5221.

Guessing it’s fluid!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

How do you think we lined up with the ball v Sheffield United.  I only listened on radio, and assumed it was a straight forward 352/532 (Pack, Smith Brownhill - Weimann, Diedhiou), yet it sounded like Brownhill was given licence to get forward, so I thought it might be more 5212 (like Cotts’s team), only to view whoscored and Stats Zone with a 5221.

Guessing it’s fluid!

I definitely saw it as a cotts style 3-4-1-2 with Brownhill in behind the two strikers. 

Then when Paterson and palmer came on it changed to a 3-4-3, much like what @BessexRED posted above 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

How do you think we lined up with the ball v Sheffield United.  I only listened on radio, and assumed it was a straight forward 352/532 (Pack, Smith Brownhill - Weimann, Diedhiou), yet it sounded like Brownhill was given licence to get forward, so I thought it might be more 5212 (like Cotts’s team), only to view whoscored and Stats Zone with a 5221.

Guessing it’s fluid!

I saw it as Brownhill slightly more advanced than Smith/Pack and Weimann just off of Diedhiou so sort of a 3-4-3 mate, but admittedly I was very, very drunk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BessexRED said:

I saw it as Brownhill slightly more advanced than Smith/Pack and Weimann just off of Diedhiou so sort of a 3-4-3 mate, but admittedly I was very, very drunk.

 

0F7747B2-508A-497D-B88D-7CB30C62EA25.jpeg

Just now, JBFC II said:

I've got no idea as I have absolutely no recollection of Wright going off! 

 

2A1F7B0E-0EAA-4D56-BE96-783191F11252.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, BessexRED said:

I saw it as Brownhill slightly more advanced than Smith/Pack and Weimann just off of Diedhiou so sort of a 3-4-3 mate, but admittedly I was very, very drunk.

As @Davefevs said, from commentary it sounded like a front 3 , although I couldn't really get my head around it from RB. The two heat maps are below, I've upped the colour to try and make it clearer

fullsizeoutput_715.jpeg

fullsizeoutput_713.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Slacker said:

Latest update on AW.Mrs W is making him a dippy egg and toasted soldiers for breakfast.

That’s a meal for when you need a bit of TLC, comfort food. If that’s the case the outlook is bleak unless eggs are a Superfood :clapping:

Seriously, I think Saturday is too soon for him, maybe Tuesday too depending on what he has done. His foot was in a boot and he was on crutches ( from what I saw on tv), but then again he played on for quite a while after he was stood on, not an immediate substitution so who knows. No doubt we aren’t giving out much info as we don’t want Wigan to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RedM said:

That’s a meal for when you need a bit of TLC, comfort food. If that’s the case the outlook is bleak unless eggs are a Superfood :clapping:

Seriously, I think Saturday is too soon for him, maybe Tuesday too depending on what he has done. His foot was in a boot and he was on crutches ( from what I saw on tv), but then again he played on for quite a while after he was stood on, not an immediate substitution so who knows. No doubt we aren’t giving out much info as we don’t want Wigan to know.

He's out for the rest of the season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...