Burnley vs Unfortunately
- Thread starter Fox Mulder
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Utterly predictable that he wouldn't change it. Dyche will also have known that.Time will tell if it matters. For me, the right idea would be to have dropped Shelvey and brought Willock in to increase mobility.
Clearly Wilsom/ASM not fit to start, which is fine.
Clearly Wilsom/ASM not fit to start, which is fine.
Exactly they're not playing.
On a separate note are we saving our best players for games we can't win at full strength anyway?
We'll get beat... Tottenham didn't like the direct ****e, but Burnley are made for it
They are not match fit.
I will go with Bruce on this one.
Only disillusioning thing is Shelvey in instead of Willock
It's a ****e side we're getting best here.
Unless by some miracle we're only 1 down with 20 to go and the subs get a goal
Predictable lineup but glad that Murphy is in for Krafth, at least.
Like most, I'd have preferred Willock in place of Shelvey. Imagine the energy of that middle three! Burnley would know they are in a game, whilst getting stretched wide too.
Fair enough if ASM and Wilson aren't fully fit but we only get three subs. If we have to make a defensive change because of injury you'd only then be able to bring on two of ASM, Wilson and Willock.
Anyway, just had a delivery of Belgian beers in, and have done the gardening over the week. All settled to get bitten by gnats, drunk, and watch us lose 1-0 to Burnley.
Like most, I'd have preferred Willock in place of Shelvey. Imagine the energy of that middle three! Burnley would know they are in a game, whilst getting stretched wide too.
Fair enough if ASM and Wilson aren't fully fit but we only get three subs. If we have to make a defensive change because of injury you'd only then be able to bring on two of ASM, Wilson and Willock.
Anyway, just had a delivery of Belgian beers in, and have done the gardening over the week. All settled to get bitten by gnats, drunk, and watch us lose 1-0 to Burnley.
Apart from Willock who would you have in considering ASM/Wilson are clearly not fit?
This was the have to go for it, but we're not doing it.
Burnley will piss this.. No legs in midfield they're going to trample all over us
Burnley will piss this.. No legs in midfield they're going to trample all over us
I am concerned that he is effectively using the lack of match fitness for Wilson and St Maximin as an excuse to set out defensively and once we get into that mindset we find it very difficult to get out of it. To be honest I would have definitely started both St Maximin and Willock. St Maximin had game time the previous weekend and whole week of training after that so there is no way he is not match fit.
This is a game that we require lots of energy and I would have gone with Willock as @JulioGeordio90 said.
This is a game that we require lots of energy and I would have gone with Willock as @JulioGeordio90 said.
They've trained
They've trained for 2 weeks.. Bruce has just rolled with never change a side that didn't get beat rule I feel.
If we're 0-0 with 20 left he'll bring them on so it might work, but if it doesn't he's made a huge huge mistake
They've trained for 2 weeks.. Bruce has just rolled with never change a side that didn't get beat rule I feel.
If we're 0-0 with 20 left he'll bring them on so it might work, but if it doesn't he's made a huge huge mistake
If it's not working he can bring them on at ht, ASM, Wilson and Willock but he won't he'll leave it till the 80th minute, more worrying is Carroll on the bench.
Has he ever made a sub at half-time if nobody is injured?
He prefers being one of the other dwarves, Grumpy.
Another thing is that we can forget willock wanting to stay because he didn't leave he bench at arsenal to not play here.
We're stuck with baldy for years
We're stuck with baldy for years
60 and 74 minutes as per Bruce’s usual timeframe