Trunds, I don't read it as a contradiction myself. What I was saying is that we should explore the possibilities to see if he could do a job. I wasn't actually touting him for it, although I don't see it as totally ridiculous shout to be honest. In fact, if he shows he can play there, it would be a good shout given his ability and experience. Mind you, I wasn't aware of this del Horno character. If he's any good, it could be a decent solution on the basis that he is a specialist LB. Good call.
Trunds, that would a hell of a good signing if it could be done. He's certainly got all the credentials.
He has to be worth a punt. Ben Davies will do fine, but i just feel he would give us a bit of overall experience. I know he is 31, but we are talking short term. Looking at who he has played for, his passing ability should be spot on and would/should be able to slot in easily. FFS Reading are still using Harte at LB and how poor/slow is he.
http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/Swansea-City-close-left/story-16827074-detail/story.html Thank god it is not robinson.
Del Horno would do a fantastic job for us I think. Very experienced and is a good passer of the ball. My only concern is pace but anything is better than drafting Tate in as LB. Is Ivor going to call it right again?
Knack, del Horno is Trundle's call. I was just agreeing with him. I still wonder if Hargreaves could do a job there though if del Horno is unavailable.
alternative line up? if we go out and attack we could go with a 3-3-3-1? ...........................Vorm............................... ....... Rangel..........Ash.............Davies............. .....Britton..........De Guzman............KI............. Dyer....................Michu....................Hernandez ...................................Graham......................
Musty the same has been happening with England for a while now. He is a good player but would you leave Rangel out.
Oh ffs I hope you're talking crap again, Dai. Tate can't play LB as long as he's got a hole in his ass. Too slow, positionally poor, no pace. He'll be murdered there, as he has been in the past. A disaster in the making. Davies is a better option - absolutely no doubt. No disrespect to Tate who has been a good servant to the Club, but I wouldn't even have him as backup LB to Davies. I'd have Richards.
Im not talking crap wait and see. He is ML's preferred choice out of what we have got. we need cover all the same in case he gets injured...
I'll hold you that, but if you're right I'll start to doubt Laudrup's judgment. Big time - particularly if he actually starts.
as it stands today tatey is the preferred choice but who knows if we will bring someone in....the problem we got is there are not many if any that ML can bring in that will automatically slot in to our style of playing...I can understand opting for tate as he has already played him and he did the job required. Lets see what happens in this next week but as it stands then Tate has the job with davies his back up....
"Tate has the job with davies his back up" Somebody please wake me up from this nightmare. Please tell me it's Dai just being Dai. "I can understand opting for tate as he has already played him and he did the job required" When did Tate play LB under Laudrup? Thought Davies deputised and Tate came on for Chico?
watch next game if we cant bring anyone in suitable...It will be Tate and i cant see anything wrong with that choice under the circumstances... http://youtu.be/mOAP3KIQ7fE take a look
