Drop Charlie!

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
S

simonstainrod

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2011
681
660
93
NULL
I know. It's almost unsayable isn't it? But the reality is we've got to try something radical to halt this inevitable slide into the Championship. Our best and most impressive performance for months was at Sunderland, without Charlie. So does anyone else think it might be worth adopting a more dynamic approach without him, with the option of deploying him from the bench for the last 20 minutes?
Thought not.
 
EErrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr No!!

However, Ramsey should start to look at optionsand tactics for other players to maybe start shooting....... it was obvious that the Arse knew Phillips to Austin was going to be our main goal threat so stuck two on Phillips
 
Sorry SS, that's on a par with the radical idea of tying all the players shoe laces together.

Vargas as an alternative to BZ in matches that we can compete in on footballing terms would be my only significant variation. It'd be nice if Austin had a bit more interplay with a creative player who isn't 40 yards away.
 
- We need goals to win matches
- Winning matches is the only way we will stay up
- Charlie is our only consistent goal scorer

Last season, when Charlie was injured our form slipped markedly, without Charlie on the pitch, we are toothless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger
Agree that the the performance at Sunderland was excellent,and that it came when Charlie was out.However the best player on the pitch that night was Fer,who was playing in his proper position for the first time all season.It worked well with him playing behind Zamora,because he has the power and energy to fill that role.I feel that we don't have anyone comparable to fill that role behind Zamora,so I'm afraid dropping Charlie is unthinkable.Leroy is an enormous loss!
 
  • Like
Reactions: finglasqpr and KooPeeArr
Not a bad idea at all even though it looks like i will be blown out of the water for saying so :)

Lets face it every defender we play against knows there is to job mark Austin, however if he were to come off the bench with 30/40 mins to play it may work.
 
KPDHoopster said:
- We need goals to win matches
- Winning matches is the only way we will stay up
- Charlie is our only consistent goal scorer

Last season, when Charlie was injured our form slipped markedly, without Charlie on the pitch, we are toothless.
Click to expand...
You're forgetting we won 2-0 without him at Sunderland. Which is the only reason I'm floating the idea
 
KooPeeArr said:
Sorry SS, that's on a par with the radical idea of tying all the players shoe laces together.

Vargas as an alternative to BZ in matches that we can compete in on footballing terms would be my only significant variation. It'd be nice if Austin had a bit more interplay with a creative player who isn't 40 yards away.
Click to expand...
Agree totally. Vargas buzzes around and seems to make things happen. In a team, that creates naff all, I'd start with him every time
 
  • Like
Reactions: KooPeeArr
simonstainrod said:
You're forgetting we won 2-0 without him at Sunderland. Which is the only reason I'm floating the idea
Click to expand...
No I'm not, I remember it all too well.

1 game does not in itself vindicate a policy.

My 3 points stand.

The problem is in midfield, not with Charlie.

Dont know why Kranky is being favoured over Isla, Zarate, and Adel (when fit).

Matty is relishing CR's approach, but the left side Hoilett/Traore/Kranky are struggling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SW Ranger
hammersmith junior said:
Agree that the the performance at Sunderland was excellent,and that it came when Charlie was out.However the best player on the pitch that night was Fer,who was playing in his proper position for the first time all season.It worked well with him playing behind Zamora,because he has the power and energy to fill that role.I feel that we don't have anyone comparable to fill that role behind Zamora,so I'm afraid dropping Charlie is unthinkable.Leroy is an enormous loss!
Click to expand...

I agree with your post Junior.

We are badly missing Fer. I think maybe we should try Vargas alongside Austin. He consistently scores playing for his country. Think it is worth a go.
 
KPDHoopster said:
No I'm not, I remember it all too well.

1 game does not in itself vindicate a policy.

My 3 points stand.

The problem is in midfield, not with Charlie.

Dont know why Kranky is being favoured over Isla, Zarate, and Adel (when fit).

Matty is relishing CR's approach, but the left side Hoilett/Traore/Kranky are struggling.
Click to expand...
Calm down, love. It's odd. Because like yours, the common held conception is that "we're toothless without him". Yet we scored twice in the one game we didn't have him. Obviously, he's the best striker at the club. But what were we doing in midfield that night that we can replicate again?
 
simonstainrod said:
Calm down, love. It's odd. Because like yours, the common held conception is that "we're toothless without him". Yet we scored twice in the one game we didn't have him. Obviously, he's the best striker at the club. But what were we doing in midfield that night that we can replicate again?
Click to expand...

Isla and Phillips caused chaos down the right hand side and Fer made great runs to support BZ. Barton also had a very good game. We are missing Fer and Barton from that side.
 
Stan Dupp said:
Perhaps someone needs to have a quiet word with SS's carers! He must be on some Charlie!
Click to expand...
I know. It's a mental idea. But we won without him. And lost every game since. Nothing against Charlie, it's just the way we play when he's in the side. Oh and I still wish his goal celebrations involved lifting his shirt to reveal a 'Je suis Charlie' t-shirt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sb_73
For me, the win at Sunderland had nothing to do with the fact that Charlie wasn't playing and everything to do with the way we set up. That game we played 4-2-3-1 and the three behind BZ interchanged positions and got up in attack and supported BZ. As previously mentioned, Fer was excellent in that game and we really miss him imo.
The whole reason I was pissed off with Ramsey's selections on Wednesday was because he went back to 4-4-2 and hoof ball. We should play 4-2-3-1 with Charlie as the one. He isn't good as a lone striker in a genuine 4-5-1, but as long as the three behind him do what was done at Sunderland, I believe he'll be fine in that role. Without Taarabt to play in the No10 role, then I'd give Vargas a go there. Not a traditional No10, but an excellent footballer imo and he knows where the goal is. Unfortunately it seems as though CR doesn't rate him!

Drop Charlie?.................................No!! Drop 4-4-2 hoof ball?........................definitely!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger4ever, sb_73 and finglasqpr
There was another manager called Ramsey who dropped his best striker before a very important match, and that turned out rather well, I believe.

But I agree with Col.
 
Drop your most valuable asset? I don't think so.

Drop the best player on the pitch last Wednesday/ NO!

On the basis of the Sunderland win you should be arguing that we should play exactly that team. However, we can't.

Perhaps you should say that the difference is that Fer hasn't played since that game. I'm having problems sugesting that as that was the first match he has played well.

It's an idea that HR may have come up with, but thankfully Ramsey won't consider it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back