I would like at some stage to see what we are like with a strike partnership... yes Larry that means 2 up front...!: I mean they spent enough time working together last season (while the rest of the squad were playing games! ) so they should have developed some kind of understanding by now?? Does anybody think they could cut it ?
Paynter is useless but having someone up front is better than having no one up front. I orginally thought it was better to have quality on the pitch over someone who could play a certain role, but was poor. Having seen the last two games, I think it's better to have someone who will at least stay in the box and provide a focal point in attack. Ross McCormack looked a lot better playing off Paynter last season, even if Paynter didn't.
YEP WORKED OK TOGETHER IN THE LAST 2 GAMES OF LAST SEASON IE DONKEY RAN AROUND KNOCKING BALLS DOWN TO McCormack
In the last 2 games of last season, when they played together it got the best out of McCormack but that didn't really help the team. All that happened was McCormack would drop deep, pick up the ball and play a through ball to his strike partner (which is a good part of his game) but then his strike partner was Paytner so he missed loads of chances.
I'd rather stick with the 4-2-3-1 but tell the wingers to stick closer to McCormack and pass it into feet.
To be fair, calling it 4-6-0 isn't much less accurate than those who still refer to it as 4-3-3 or 4-5-1.
Well I can't call it 4-2-4-0 because then it just looks like 4-2-4, 4-6-0 makes my point better. McCormack was meant to be a lone striker but there were times when he was in his own half with the entire midfield ahead of him.
McCormack's a support striker. He's quality when he drops deeper, picks the ball up and then plays a pass. He can finish as well, and has a good right foot shot. I'd like to see him alongside another striker.
