I agree that Livermore has played better of late and is deserving of a starting place. Hudds has been the constant that had been constantly disappointing; but fate plays a hand. Regardless of whether we play RWBs or RWs, we desperately need to move the game higher up the pitch. Hudds sits far too deep, which negates his natural game of setting up sudden attack from incisive passing, as his passes have too much to do, are easily read and lose any impetus on an attack usually poorly set up - Jelavic cannot compensate, it's unfair for SB to expect it. Personally I am sick and tired of the swapping and changing and I bet the players are too. SB should pick a system and stick with it; how the hell he is taking any sort of useful measure is beyond me, he simply seems to confuse everyone, including himself - stop tinkering, ffs. My personal choice would be 4-4-2. Play Rosie at RB and Robertson at LB, play Elmo and Brady in from at RW and LW. The two CB can be from Chess, Davis, Bruce and McShane - Dawson when fit. Midfield is Livermore and then try a choice from Aluko, Quinn, Meyler, Diame (the choice, when fit), just give a new partnership a try for a few games. The key partnership to this discussion has to be Jelavic and Hernandez, but a flat front two, no need to be overly prescriptive about playing the hole, etc. Give the players some instinctive latitude, let them be expressive and let the m be the ones to work out their approach - SB needs to reduce his instructions and let his players do their own thing - within reason.
Its not tinkering is it. We've had **** luck with injuries, suspensions. People are naming their ideal team on here and naming injured players FFS. These are professional players they have no problem switching systems form 4-4-2 to 3-5-2 or 4-2-3-1. All of which have looked good at times. Its only fans who have preferred formations. You say Robbo at LB but he's made so many mistakes, he's a young kid and needs nursing through his first season in the PL. Surely you dont expect him to play every week for 38 games? So he doesnt, so Rosy comes in. Who is more than capable of playing LB. Ramirez looked excellent against Spurs, then gets banned for 3 games. How can Brucey legislate for that, how does that effect his formation? He has to change it.
Spot on post, and that is what almost everyone else on here see's. I dont know why Steve bruce doesn't. And now welcome all the posters who will call us poodles and remind us that Brucie knows more about football than all of us on here put together.
An interesting vine I saw on Amber Nectar. [video]https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/videos_h264high/5660700D0E1148345338173005824_SW_WEBM_141676099021 4ed811ad48b.mp4?versionId=Rm6fLHOy747ZvhSviDg0KEwZ 6YYIZEVy[/video]
I would play Ramirez, I simply failed to list him as I was posting quickly; I aren't saying which I would play just saying we have options.
Bruce is waiting to hear from the FA if it will be 3 or 4 game ban with the yellow card tot up as well.
I think it's tinkering, that is driven to some degree by injuries / suspensions - one reason soon becomes confused with the other. "Its only fans who have preferred formations." of course they are professionals and of course they can play other formations but that comment is simply daft. Players have formations they prefer, especially when they have played with link-players regularly and that is my point, there is no regularly; it's a dogs dinner. Why not play Robbo, can you think of a better way of schooling him? He doesn't have to play it all, but he's a fit keen kid and I can see nothing wrong with schooling him and supporting him with prudent subs when needed - prudent subs have not been a SB strong-point of late though, have they? I accept that Robbo has defensive frailties, but so does Elmo. Why not start with Robbo at LB and Brady at LW and drop Brady back if Robbo needed taking off? Truth is there are options, but none that offer the same threat as Robbo if he gets his blood up. I don't see the point in discussing the merits of Rosie at LB unless you can say who the RB/RW players are, as it Rosie before Elmo as a RB everyday of the week for me.
Any of our midfields that include both Meyler and Quinn are there for the sole purpose of grinding out draws. Ramirez and/or Ben Arfa have to step up. **** me, we'll be paying ****loads for their wages. Elmo needs to be put in midfield with Rosie behind him. I would stick Brady as left WB and leave Robertson as an impact player from the bench.
No it doesnt. Dawson injured for the second time. Chester suspended for 3 games. Jelavic injured then ill. Hernandez ****s off cos his mrs is pregnant. Diame injured, came back, broke down. Hudd now suspended. Spine of the team. Its not a dogs dinner at all. You just prefer old school 4-4-2. So do i. But i was proven wrong with 3 at the back, as were many others. The consensus on here was get back to 3-5-2 when he went to 4 at the back. Why not play Robbo? He has. Did Fergie keep playing giggs game in game out? No. Robbo was ****ing awful a few weeks ago and was rightly dropped. Same with Brady. Elmo's "defensive frailties are nowhere near Robbo's. In fact i cant think of any this season. Bruce has consistently picked Elmo over Rosy because he offers more of an attacking threat. The modern RB has to play like a RW and be more of an attacking player, Rosy is poor at this and is an out and out defender. Would Hazard have scored with Rosy at LB. I doubt it.
No it doesnt. Dawson injured for the second time. Chester suspended for 3 games. Jelavic injured then ill. Hernandez ****s off cos his mrs is pregnant. Diame injured, came back, broke down. Hudd now suspended. Spine of the team. Its not a dogs dinner at all. You just prefer old school 4-4-2. So do i. But i was proven wrong with 3 at the back, as were many others. The consensus on here was get back to 3-5-2 when he went to 4 at the back. Why not play Robbo? He has. Did Fergie keep playing giggs game in game out? No. Robbo was ****ing awful a few weeks ago and was rightly dropped. Same with Brady. Elmo's "defensive frailties are nowhere near Robbo's. In fact i cant think of any this season. Bruce has consistently picked Elmo over Rosy because he offers more of an attacking threat. The modern RB has to play like a RW and be more of an attacking player, Rosy is poor at this and is an out and out defender. Would Hazard have scored with Rosy at LB. I doubt it.
When I consider the class that Hazard has, I think my answer has to be probably he would have done, yes. But we are both guessing, aren't we?
I'll leave it Fez. You seem to just want to batter Bruce and have a so what attitude to any reasonable point. Best defender, Dawson. Been injured. Other CB's, one off form all season the other served a 3 match ban. Back ups are just that back ups. Not as good. Midfield misfiring all season. No confusion for them what their job is, is there. But they've not performed. Diame the best of them, injured. Robbo, cant defend. FACT. Responsible for too many mistakes and goals conceded. As a manager you'd have to drop him then bring him back. Its ridiculous to suggest you plough on with a young kid. It could destroy him. Bruce is a good manager, yes he makes mistakes. He's had a **** run of luck. But he'll battle on and I'll still back him. If we go down then so be it. But I want him in charge of us for years to come whatever league we are in . IN BRUCE WE TRUST
Interesting our possession stat against Man Utd when Hudds didn't play was 23% our next lowest was 34% with 11 men against Arsenal. We had 27% against Spurs but we spent 40 mins with 10 men. As for replacement I'd go with Quinn. Nice neat tidy footballer.
A centre back at right back, a right back at left back and a left back on the left wing, are you pissed?
I'm expecting... McGregor Rosenior Chester Davies Robertson Elmo Livermore Meyler Brady Hernandez Jelavic Possibly Aluko instead of Hernandez.
Why is offering my opinion (which is well shared on here) about his confusing selections and substitutions 'just wanting to batter him'? So you would be happier if I simply agree with you; is that how it works? I have explained my view on injuries/suspensions and I don't understand why that is a 'so what' attitude. You've focused on the defensive injuries and suspension, which is fine, but the 'back-ups' came in and did a job - a job made very difficult because we were not set up to hold the ball up in midfield and keep some form of respectable possession. I find it remarkable that you think our back-up players are not good enough - I would call them squad players and argue that they are just as every other club's squad players are. You really think there is no confusion in midfield? Do you not think moving from 3-5-2 to 4-4-2 is confusing. A RB at LB, is that confusing? Why has the midfield been misfiring all season? Whose job is it to sort that? So we have bought a LB that can't defend, you say that is a FACT; I say that is bollocks? Okay, he has to improve, but he is not on his own from what you have said; older and more experienced players at that. I explained how I would handle Robbo, but you ignore that. I think Bruce a good manager and I am appreciative of what he has achieved so far, but I will discuss (with them that wishes) why I believe he plays a key role in why we have been faltering for a 12 month period. Of course, the coaches and playing staff must share the burden of blame, but the buck stops with . . . . There is no disguising the fact that Bruce knows he is under pressure, I will support him on match day, I have stumped up for the banner, but on an internet forum intended for discussion I will air my concerns and listen to the views of others. Cheers.
