Trippier

  • 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!
Warm Pouch said:
Aye I just worry about where him and Dummett result in us playing the game. Probably unpopular because Dummy is a local lad, but I actually think he presents the same problem to a lesser extent on the other side. They play like an old school full back but the game is more dynamic now. You need to be pressed on and stop inviting teams on top of you. Lets be honest Lascelles and Schar are more than happy to play on the edge of their box too, but both have shown (particularly Schar) they can play the higher line we need to squeeze the game.

I think Murphy is awful wherever he plays. But he does press the ball somewhat and is mobile. Like Nev says in the future it won't be such an issue. We will have our first choice and then because an ethos is installed at all levels, we'll have ready made young players in the same mould to step up. For now I'd be tempted to say to Schar play like a modern full back and enjoy yourself. He fancies himself as a baller anyway. The only knock on it has is it leaves us with no one to step into midfield with the ball and Schar has been doing that well in recent games.
Click to expand...


going 3 cbs with wingbacks might be an option.

God knows but if we play with Murphy Krafth or Ritchie in a 4 we'll be getting beat again more than likely
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warmir Pouchov and G4rdToonArmy
G4rdToonArmy said:
4-6 weeks so hope Manquillo is not as bad as it looked but if both out I agree moving Schar out wide with Lacselles and Burn at the back, Targett LB obviously!
Click to expand...


I'm not sure breaking up the two cbs is a good idea personally.

Ok we've got a problem at rb, but not in cb or cm and we could create problems in more areas than just rb.

I'd just stock with what's, working and address the only hole that's already there
 
  • Like
Reactions: magpie290761
Billions and Billions said:
going 3 cbs with wingbacks might be an option.

God knows but if we play with Murphy Krafth or Ritchie in a 4 we'll be getting beat again more than likely
Click to expand...

I'd steer clear of 3/5 at the back. in reality we need to bring in one player to replace Trippier and stick with the same formation/players who've done well so far.

You'd either have to drop a CM or a winger to go 3 at the back and don't think any of them deserve to lose their place currently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warmir Pouchov, magpie290761, Joelinton's Right Foot and 1 other person
G4rdToonArmy said:
I'd steer clear of 3/5 at the back. in reality we need to bring in one player to replace Trippier and stick with the same formation/players who've done well so far.

You'd either have to drop a CM or a winger to go 3 at the back and don't think any of them deserve to lose their place currently.
Click to expand...

Cough Shelvey Cough









Ps it's not COVID
 
  • Like
Reactions: G4rdToonArmy
G4rdToonArmy said:
I'd steer clear of 3/5 at the back. in reality we need to bring in one player to replace Trippier and stick with the same formation/players who've done well so far.

You'd either have to drop a CM or a winger to go 3 at the back and don't think any of them deserve to lose their place currently.
Click to expand...

Yes I think I agree..

If you have a good bowl of soup and one ingredient is unavailable you just change one ingredient and you might not notice much difference but if you change 3 or 4 or you end up with a completely different bowl of soup.

The current bowl of soup does the job.
 
Billions and Billions said:
Yes I think I agree..

If you have a good bowl of soup and one ingredient is unavailable you just change one ingredient and you might not notice much difference but if you change 3 or 4 or you end up with a completely different bowl of soup.

The current bowl of soup does the job.
Click to expand...

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obi Wan and Munson.
Billions and Billions said:
Yes I think I agree..

If you have a good bowl of soup and one ingredient is unavailable you just change one ingredient and you might not notice much difference but if you change 3 or 4 or you end up with a completely different bowl of soup.

The current bowl of soup does the job.
Click to expand...

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: Munson.
Without our transformational leader, his ability, his confidence, his aura that spreads across the team, his reassuring presence on the pitch - all of which has brought belief to the rest of the players …. we’re going to evaporate.

We’re going down now; it was a brief flirtation with hope. Could only happen to NUFC.
 
Seen a few people suggesting 5-4-1 (diamond) dropping Fraser and Maxi with a diamond of Willock, Joe Bruno AND Shelvey
-------------Wood
-------------Willock
-------Joelinton--Bruno
Targett--Shelvey--Fraser
--Burn-Lacselles-Schar

Interesting though! I'd have been thinking of 3-4-3 sacrificing a CM tbh or 3-5-2 to maintain the 3 in CM but a diamond is actually a really interesting idea...

Joe and Bruno covering the lateral wide positions to support full back and Willock and Shelvey occupying the middle.

A lot putting Murphy as FB but I'd go with Fraser as a WB and Targett on the other side if this is the way we go.
 
Last edited:
G4rdToonArmy said:
Seen a few people suggesting 5-4-1 (diamond) dropping Fraser and Maxi with a diamond of Willock, Joe Bruno AND Shelvey
-------------Wood
-------------Willock
-------Joelinton--Bruno
Targett--Shelvey--Fraser
--Dunk-Lacselles-Schar

Interesting though! I'd have been thinking of 3-4-3 sacrificing a CM tbh or 3-5-2 to maintain the 3 in CM but a diamond is actually a really interesting idea...

Joe and Bruno covering the lateral wide positions to support full back and Willock and Shelvey occupying the middle.

A lot putting Murphy as FB but I'd go with Fraser as a WB and Targett on the other side if this is the way we go.
Click to expand...

I think signing Dunk may be a bit tricky outside of a transfer window <laugh>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warmir Pouchov, G4rdToonArmy and Obi Wan
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back