What I said and still feel was this: Looking back at Ipswich, now, I wonder if there's more to the line-up choice. With Jarvis and Pritchard injured, Jacob returning from injury and Canos not yet fully match fit, AN had a dilemma on the right side. Jacob and Canos were good options on the bench and both got their chance as subs, but AN needed another option and that was Howson starting on the right. Mulumbu isn't really a DM, having played alongside a DM at West Brom and Howson is the best attacking option of our CMs. With Pinto and Brady playing as FB/WBs, we did achieve a fair amount of width with that formation. That was lost when Pinto had to be replaced because of a tweaked hamstring. Whittaker can play the FB/WB role as well and he did get two good shots in, one on target and the other hitting the post, but he almost conceded a goal as well. Jacob came on for Mulumbu after 61 minutes to provide a different attacking option which allowed Whittaker to concentrate more fully on his FB duties and Howson to return to CM. Canos was another attacking substitution and Ipswich had difficulty picking up the subs as they produced a lot of movement behind Jerome. On another day, it might have produced the victory we all wanted, but I don't think AN got enough credit for dealing with a difficult situation
But Canos for Naismith would mean they are playing in their correct position. Your point was that Canos does not play in Naismiths position. However, this is a moot point as it would allow Wes to play centrally with Canos in his preferred wide right position.
Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier. I'll have to disagree there RER - let's leave Naismith on the bench and then we can have players playing in their preferred positions!!!!
