CGS RED Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 3-5-1-1...............................................PHILLIPS.............................................................................SKUSE..................HEYWOOD.................PARTRIDGE......................ORR............BROWN.................WILKSHIRE..................SMITH...........WOODMAN................................................COTTERILL.......................................................................................................STEWART..........................................................SUBSBRIDGESGILLESPIERUSSELLCAREYGKAssuming Brooker's still out for the next two at least. A no nonsense, solid, away, hit 'em on the break, formation to deny Forest width and not allow them to play through us.Skuse's extra pace at the back and better passing and distribution, should help Heywood and Orr is no slouch or midget, either.The two best games I've seen Orr have were as a substitute right back, so why not give him a try and transfer list Smith.Another rick of Tinnions was to sign him for another year.Cotterill can get the ball facing goal and run at the them.The only downside is no height up front and perhaps that'll help to make us pass it instead of BOOT IT!!!Millen?4-4-2 and another defeat with Murray & Carey both starting ← Away against Forest, I believe you have it right. Interesting points from other posters, but your team has the potential to actually win. I understand Millens unlike Tins, does read the forum several times a week. Source, the BCFC wives network. They actually are a wealth of information. Even SL's wife Badger reads on a regular basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Boy Posted September 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 I do find these threads entertaining and interesting but you seem to go for a different 11 every game. Teams that do well in this division tend to be relatively unchanged from week to week and play in the same formation home and away. That way they get to play as a team. For that reason alone, I would make minimal changes to last Saturday's starting line-up.←If Brooker was available and we were playing well, I'd agree.I've been saying this since the start of the season with 3-5-2 or 4-3-1-2 type formations to suit the players we have.It's not just the results, it's the performance level that bothers me more.If we can stop conceeding we'll pinch wins here and there and when we're confident we can go for stability and a more expanisive game.It's not about keeping the same peopleFor example, at home we could go with the same formation but change it slightly to be more attacking:.............................................PHILLIPS..............................................................................SKUSE................HEYWOOD................PARTRIDGE.........................COTTERILL...........BROWN............RUSSELL............WILKSHIRE............SMITH...........................................BROOKER....................BRIDGES..............................Cotterill could move into the hole behind the strikers from that position and you never know, we might deliver some quality crosses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 3-5-1-1...............................................PHILLIPS.............................................................................SKUSE..................HEYWOOD.................PARTRIDGE......................ORR............BROWN.................WILKSHIRE..................SMITH...........WOODMAN................................................COTTERILL.......................................................................................................STEWART..........................................................SUBSBRIDGESGILLESPIERUSSELLCAREYGK←Trouble is, I can't see us scoring with that line up BB. I think you can keep it tight at the back and have more forward options. Wilkshire is too light weight for me. Skuse has the makings of a decent midfielder, indeed the way he sprayed it around a couple of times on Saturday, perhaps he is the new Tinnion.I agree Murray is past his best and looks unlikely to return to past glories - which were mainly in one season anyway - but I wouldnt write off Carey, he's a quality player when in form, IMO.I wouldnt fancy playing as a forward against this defence, the midfield is strong but with some creativity, and guile/pace up front: PHILLIPSKEOGH................HEYWOOD.................PARTRIDGEORR................BROWN........BRIDGES.....SKUSE.........WOODMAN STEWART..............GILLESPIE/COTTERILLSUBS:CAREYGILLESPIE/COTTERILLSMITH GMURRAYMADJO (never seen him play, but sounds like a last throw of the dice sort of option) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyRed Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 Whatever happens, we definitely shouldn't play the same team that started Saturday. 1. Murray doesn't deserve a starting place.2. Skuse and Brown DO NOT work in the middle of the park.3. It's an away game and should require a different formation to a home game.I like BB's selection, though I might have tried Gillespie instead of Stewart up front, as I think if we're going to play to hit them on the break, we need a bit of pace up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest REDCIDERARMY Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 I would not change to much from saturday except Bridges for gillespie. Phillips carey heywood partridge woodman murray skuse brown smth stewart bridges subs orr,gillespie,etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.