He is not mentally ill OR thick, and I find it objectional that you could inimate such a thing!!! He just plain ****!!! Get rid ****ing quickly.
Mackie was only put to right back once we went down to 10 men mate. rightly so, as we needed a back 4!! Don't agree with anything you said. 4-5-1 would have made us far more competitive in the middle of the park which would have led to more possession. I don't think any other Premier League manager would have played 4-4-2 against a midfield 3 of Wilshire, Arteta and Corzola!!
Yes Arsenal's midfield is good. But their defence is total pony with the exception of Vermaelen. Sagna wasn't fit. Mertesacker is a clown and Gibbs is unreliable. Why wouldn't you go 2 up front to try and get a result?! We were never gonna get the ball out wide and pace them down the wings, neither Hoilett nor Taarabt do that as they both cut inside. You're being very cynical about saying 4-5-1 this 4-5-1 that, it doesn't work for us. We haven't got a good enough forward to play it, and we haven't got a good enough/consistent enough player to link the midfield with our front man. Simple as.
Granero, he also looked pretty handy curling one in from the edge of the box but as I said, formations dont matter when we are so negative. Both us and Reading have a FK in injury time, we pass it about in midfield and time runs out, Reading put 9 men in the box and score. Hughes is killing us as a club with his negativity which is a shame as we have the players to entertain.
I don't want to be too blunt mate....but you're talking bollocks! Taarabt or Granero are plenty good enough to link the midfield with the attack. 4-2-3-1 would suit us perfectly, as would 4-3-3 or even, at a push 4-1-3-2....but NOT 4-4-2. It is so out-dated and gets over-run in midfield, like today. 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 both become 4-5-1 when you lose the ball. I could go on, but I fear I'm banging my head against a brick wall here. Hughes doesn't play the formations I want....how are we doing?
False. Granero is not an attacking midfielder. He plays as a deep lying playmaker. Taarabt doesn't play in the middle as he likes to drift out wide. Neither are capable. Granero and Faurlin are too similar to play in the same team; Granero is much better. The attacking midfielder would have to be able to do a shift and help score; Michu at Swansea, Felliani at Everton are two prime examples. We do not have players such as these. My point is not that we should be playing 4-4-2, my point is that we do not have a player to link the midfield with the striker, hence why playing a lone striker would not suffice.
What an utter dissembling twat he is, cannot believe he has the nerve to spout such crap after boasting we would never be in trouble like last season again with him in charge. Whoever comes in is going to have to be pretty damn good to save us at this stage.
Taarabt was the exact player you describe throughout our Championship winning year. Of course he can play centrally!! But even if you're right and Granero can't play in an advanced role, we can still play this: -----------------------Cesar----------------------- Bosingwa----------M'Bia----Nelsen------------Traore -----------------Granero---Faurlin------------------ Hoilett---------------Diakite----------------Taarabt -----------------Cisse or Mackie------------------- Or --------------------------Cesar---------------------- Bosingwa-------------M'Bia----Nelsen-----------Traore -------------------------Diakite---------------------- ----------------Granero---------Faurlin--------------- Hoilett-----------------------------------------Taarabt --------------------Cisse or Mackie-------------------
Those would be my home and away formations. We fit all our best players in and youd only need to tweak the intent of the players rather than major changes. eg Were 1-0 up against man u with 10 to go and under pressure so the 4231 becomes a 4141. Both formations are solid in the centre and we wouldnt get outplayed by the opposition and the flanks offer a good threat going forward.
Cant disagree with ya mate. We were aiming at the stars to get anything from Arsenal away, but we should have... easy excuse is the red card, but i dont buy into that. We had our chances and a better front man would have taken them.. An old top manager once told me that EVERY team will have 2 chances in a game..no-matter who they are..Man utd or Vauxhaul Motors. The good teams will convert those chances and the others will miss Well we confirmed ourselves as also-rans !! Final thought is..having our GK as MOM shows how bad our outfield is !
Just seen the game now. What strikes me most is that again as at Man C, Spurs, home to Chelsea, we put in a half decent display but come away without anything, or not enough. Inject the agression (not just Mackie) into the team that we showed only in the last 5 minutes or so Saturday, into a whole game we might well get more from these games and survive the season. But I don't think Hughes has it in him- as ever he played it cautious and dour, and contributed to 70 minutes of boring football against an equally dour Arsenal side, that we should have got more from Saturday. I must say as well from the comments I was expecting a terrible display from SWP, but I thought he was no worse than most, he made one appalling pass and some bad crosses, but he also sent in 2 or 3 dangerous crosses that our tameless strike force should of done a lot more with. That's 2 or 3 more dangerous crosses than I remember from our good Captain all season. We are strong midfield, but looked desperate at the back when Arsenal had a go first and last 10 minutes. And Zamora, or Cisse come to that, did nothing. For once I agree with Hughes moaning - it was an extremely clear offside goal, terrible decision, and I couldn't see that M'bia connected, despite the intent.
Holding on for 80 minutes, while we got 2 shots towards their goal while they had 20 at us, and then for us to go down to 10 in the last 10 and then wake up to get 2 more shots (one on target) in that last 10 minutes, shouldn't be considered HALF-DECENT !!!!! Without some saves from Cesar, we would've been at least 2 down by the 80th minute. I'm sorry to have to keep beating a dead horse, but getting 4 shots TOTAL, 3 on target in all of 90 minutes with 30% possession is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Not even close.
I agree Yappy, but in midfield we put on a half decent display - we have PL quality there now, no doubt, especially if we play Ale. It is the lack of agression up front, and at the back coupled with lack of defensive nous, and strange tactical and player selection from hughes that is giving us problems.
couldn't believe swp was playing he was crap all afternoon & zamora about the same, should have played cisse from the start, they were there for the taking but not with side we put out.
Wiltshire may not have even played and everyone in 'earshot' of me said he would only last 50-60mins which he did. Managers pick formations which they feel is right for the team they are playing. For me nothing wrong with who played and where.
