For fear of being prosecuted for libel- "superman was not a conman and never has been and in my opinion never will be- he is a very good boy" Happy now Dave???
longsight, no harm done with your joke. my 'reputation' was in tatters long before you said i was a convicted conman! but i'm still going to sue you for libel
Not a criminal offence, slander and libel are civil matters. If found guilty of either you pay damages but you don't get a criminal record. The only time it's a criminal matter is if you breach a court order doing so. Still in poor taste if it was a joke
I think the problem at the moment is we have a big skillful striker playing left wing who can cross well hold the ball brilliantly and do things that a big target man can do, so automatically it looks weird <if you call 3 wins 1 loss and a draw a problem>. If you look at Lafferty's game he doesn't score more than 10 goals a season some of them being set pieces and he is not a natural center forward he is a winger that looks like a striker . I personally don't see Bournemouth being able to stifle our attack last week as there being a problem with our front 3 of Kyle Redders and Grabban , if there was concern I would put Murphy on the left as he is another winger and drop Lafferty. As was mentioned earlier the main contributor as far as goals and wins is concerned is Grabban so we should mould the team to suit his style rather than shift him to the wing to try and get Lafferty scoring.
Not sure I agree with that. The way our team is set-up is clearly helping Grabban somewhat, but the lack of goals/chances for Redmond, Lafferty and Hoolahan would suggest it isn't doing them any favours (early days yet admittedly). If changing the set-up can help the others to get on the scoresheet, then I'm all for it. If Grabban is our only serious goal threat then it's much easier to mark him out of the game, and we'll struggle if he has an off-day or dips in form. But if we have Lafferty, Redmond, Grabban and Hoolahan all getting into good positions and netting regularly, then we're much more difficult for the opposition to contain, and less dependent on a single players performance. Whilst it's 5 goals from 5 for Grabban, it's also the same number for our whole front 4. If Grabban moving into a slightly different role means our front 4 score 6 or 7 in 5 games between them, then I'd say it's worth the change.
I think they do switch during the game but the other forwards haven't converted in the central areas ,maybe Hooper will but he is not fit and Lafferty as our main threat is frightening , Jerome should thrive given game time too. Great problems as a manager Adams has been backed by the board to have a real good go this season and if he has an ounce of tactical ability we should steamroll this division if truth be told.
exactly. i'm not sure why some people seem so scared of tweaking the front three. surely if we tweak it and get more out of all three rather than just grabban, that's a good thing? or am i going completely mad?
I'm coming in late on this one, but I'd like to ask a few questions. If we are going to tweak the front three to create more opportunities for Redmond, Lafferty and Hoolahan, just where is the evidence that they will take them? Grabban and Lafferty weren't around last season, so someone remind me just how many goals Redmond and Hoolahan have scored. I think there will be goals scored by others (including Lafferty and Jerome), but at the moment Grabban is the one who has scored 5 goals in 5 games. The only one who might challenge him in that regard (and I emphasize might) is Hooper when he is fit again. Hooper is the more natural CF, and I can see tweaking things to bring him in and play Grabban in a wider role, but even that is a gamble. There was a time when this sort of thinking was called dangerous 'tinkering', and as such it needs to be undertaken with caution.
why are you so dead against changing things a bit? surely its as big a gamble to keep things as they are, baring in mind many people feel its not really functioning as well as it could. its funny, and i'm not trying to start another war of words or anything but it does seem as though the people who have been to most of the games agree that the front players are not quite working as well as they could be, and the ones who haven't think we should stick with how things are. that's a generalisation but are people getting caught up on stats too much? all i or anyone who questions anything get told is 'grabban has five goals'. yes, he does, but there's more to football than just looking at goal tallies and for me, none of the front three work as a unit together in the setup we currently deploy. still early days of course and they are all still getting to know each others games but it just doesn't look right when you're watching it. its been discussed to death during games i've been to around me in the barclay. nobody seems happy with the blend for whatever reason. one thing is for certain we now have the personnel to change and be flexible. i just don't see why we wouldn't utilise that flexibility. i'd be very surprised if adams doesn't work on something a little different for the cardiff game.
One thing I noticed at the Bournemouth game was that the front three were interchanging a lot. Redmond crossed for the goal from the right but also spent a lot of time on the left and coming infield. Lafferty was popping up centrally and Grabban was pushing out to the right. It appears, tactically, we're trying to get the front three to play as fluidly as possible. It may just be that the tactics need changing slightly rather than personnel or positions.
I'm not at war on this one, Supers, but I do feel that Grabban is a natural goalscorer, and that Wes and Redmond are not (at least not yet in Redmond's case). Jerome is still new to the team and will have an important role to play in the future, but his career scoring stats are not immediately impressive. Hooper is the only other striker I feel has that sort of regular scoring ability and tweaking to allow him an important role I can see. It's as simple as that, I'm afraid.
