Running a little late for his press conference today Kit said that Parker and McCormack are in the squad. However Richards is out with the thigh injury. The back four will be kind of interesting. Jack Grimmer is the obvious replacement for Jazz Richards, surely. He wouldn’t put Hoogland with his defensive frailties there, surely not!? With Shaun Hutchinson out (and playing for the U21s last night), will Bodurov or Burn partner Michael Turner? I’d go Burn; Kit will go Bodurov! And left back? Guess it’s between Husband and Stafylidis. First up though, they’re both on loan and Kit can only have 5 loan players in the match squad. We currently have 7. Richard Lee isn’t eligible to play against his old team, while Richards is also out. Turner and Fofana are certs for the squad and I think Guthrie will be midfield cover on the bench (we’ve hardly got an abundance of players to choose from). So Kit still has the luxury on this occasion of putting both H and S in the squad. I believe Stafs days are numbered, therefore it’s James Husband who will get the starting nod - as much to see what he's made of. From there it depend on whether Kit decides to try and play it tight - and by that I mean defensive rather than narrow - from the outset or be a bit more expansive. And whether the ‘jet lagged’ Ruiz is up for it. I’m going for ‘expansive’ but without Bryan. Which still leaves a bit of jiggle-room on whether to play McCormack deep and have Woodrow or Hugo partnering Smith. My guess is Kit will compromise, resorting to his normal preference of bringing on another front man late on - ’expansive’ being a relative term and open to interpretation. ………………….Bettinelli…………….. ..Grimmer….Turner……Bodurov……..Husband.. …………….Tunnicliffe…Parker…. …….Hoogland……………….Fofana…. …………Smith………McCormack…
I think he'll play either Ruiz or Kaca considering we're at home with probably Fofana missing out. Can't argue with the rest of your team though.
An interesting article I read earlier in the week, regarding playing formations and analysing the various styles teams tend to play under. referring to the diamond set up it which Kit seems to favour week in and week out, it stated to be successful you need firstly " 2 quality attacking wing backs and a good goalscoring forward. Well we have the c/f usually played out of position and none existing f/backs we can see it so why cant Kit
………………….Bettinelli…………….. ..Bodurov….Turner……Burn……..Husband... …Hoogland……Parker….Kavanagh.. …………….…Ruiz............ …………Smith………McCormack… Not sure he will play Ruiz or Kavanagh but that's what I'd do. Not sure if Guthrie will play instead of Kavanagh. Not sure I agree that you have to have attacking fullbacks for a diamond formation. For me a diamond formation works best when you get the ball as quickly as possible to the attacking midfield to attack the opposition before they can form two lines of four, something with our slow possession build up we haven't done too often.
Maybe kit watched the England Italy game and Roys experiment with the diamond. If so he would have seen the limitations of the system and why 4-3-3 is a much better way for us to play... Fat chance! As with any decent team that comes up against us we run the risk of a serious pumping, hopefully the fact it's a derby with motivate players but when the system isn't working only so much running around with extra intensity can do. Personally don't see much point playing Ruiz and Smith jn the same team as out style differs for either, although regardless of whether Smith is playing we will still play lots of long balls.
No and I don't think there will be one available. They're only around when one of the betting sites offer live streaming on the game which none of them are for this one unfortunately.
Damn - not sure if we've gone for a 4-4-2 with Fofana on the right or if it's the classic diamond, suspect the latter. Surprised he's dropped two newbies in for this one.
There was only one person responsible for that defeat - the man who played a powder puff attack for 61minutes and 15 seconds.
Without wanting to think about this game to much could somebody please tell me how Husband played??? Tony Cottee on sky said he was our best player and biggest positive, I rate him and think he could be a decent signing for us!
Following my deep breathing exercises and a couple of glasses of scotch, I can start on my analytical rant. This was one ,if not the worse defensive displays I have seen all season, we were playing against in my opinion a poor team ,who after the first 20 min seeing very little of the ball, realised that to run through the centre or use their wing men they could cut a swathe through our back line up. Husband got in a few good tackles looked promising but then the subsequent passes went astray And as for Dracula between the posts ( he hates crosses) another display of no positional sense apart from the first, "he could have been unsighted" conceded another 3 all from a range of 20/30 yrd + 2 mishandled corners who lucky for us were hoofballed away.. If you ask for a Fulham M O T M such as it was I would say Fofana who tried. Mc C has little of no ,pace and playing on the wing. ? Smith after coming on tried but with little coming in from the wings was not to effective Symonds in the last 10 or so minutes was, and I think quit rightly so, barracked no team plan whatsoever and is without doubt completely out of his depth, he is a dead man walking, someone who will be most likely replaced in the summer, but lets hope it wont be from Div 1
I don't think Betts had to do anything with the goals. They were taken exceptionally well in contrast with our efforts who were soft!,, Fingers crossed we can get a couple of wins and be safe... Kit is out of his depth big time! The problem is that with his comments and system might doing more harm than good...
Was not at the game so cannot comment on his general performance but sky did show the goals and I didn't think Betts was at fault for any of them
Husband best player on the pitch. So much better than the Greek. The defensive is truly awful. To concede another 4 and at home. Any other manager would have been sacked. The long ball we played to Woodrow was a complete waste of time, I felt sorry for him. Time and time again done in the air he couldn't win against both pretty solid CB's. Then finally Symons changes it. Smith on and hey presto we win ball. And we actually start to create chances. Why on earth is Smith not starting.
Leaving aside the other points you made, I really don't know how more teams don't realise this one thing. It's embarrassing how easy it is to bypass our defence. Is nobody training them this season?
Another frustrating day at The Cottage. We’ll stay up, but only just! Some interesting posts, but a few perspectives I disagree with… Sorry but I would not heap the blame on Cauley; I very much doubt that Hugo would have done any better against a strong central defence, but it was interesting to see Matt Smith acting as the “impact player”. The problem was midfield, of whom our #12 was the poorest player on the pitch. Sorry Kunye, but seeing your frustration, I have to disagree on both points. Madness is right that blaming our ‘keeper for the goals is unjustified. Leaving people unmarked for the first two goals was the biggest failing on the pitch. Which relates to my second disagreement.. Fofana was, yet again, a liability - to the degree that my new steam was to about to write a new stream I don’t want to see him starting again. To end on a more positive note, I have to agree that James Husband played well - what a relief to have a left-back who can bomb-on, get-back, tackle and not go AWOL! COYW!
