We don't need a striker
Sun Nov 22, 2015 11:00 pm
To make up the numbers. For Gods sake it's not
Just play 5 in the middle with Gunner Ralls and Witts and Noone and Kennedy out wide supporting Jones and getting crosses into the box supported by one of the 3 central players getting into the box. This means our Fullbacks pushing up more defensively to ensure the midfield is tight. It's not frigging rocket science. We have the players but the system is wrong. You CANNOT play 442 for one simple reason, when the opposition have 5 in the middle against our two ineffective 2 strikers, they win the second ball, which means we always surrender possession - hence the stats. Why can't Slade see this. It's obvious.
Just play 5 in the middle with Gunner Ralls and Witts and Noone and Kennedy out wide supporting Jones and getting crosses into the box supported by one of the 3 central players getting into the box. This means our Fullbacks pushing up more defensively to ensure the midfield is tight. It's not frigging rocket science. We have the players but the system is wrong. You CANNOT play 442 for one simple reason, when the opposition have 5 in the middle against our two ineffective 2 strikers, they win the second ball, which means we always surrender possession - hence the stats. Why can't Slade see this. It's obvious.
Re: We don't need a striker
Mon Nov 23, 2015 12:04 am
Brezza wrote:To make up the numbers. For Gods sake it's not
Just play 5 in the middle with Gunner Ralls and Witts and Noone and Kennedy out wide supporting Jones and getting crosses into the box supported by one of the 3 central players getting into the box. This means our Fullbacks pushing up more defensively to ensure the midfield is tight. It's not frigging rocket science. We have the players but the system is wrong. You CANNOT play 442 for one simple reason, when the opposition have 5 in the middle against our two ineffective 2 strikers, they win the second ball, which means we always surrender possession - hence the stats. Why can't Slade see this. It's obvious.
We need a far better midfield than that!
Re: We don't need a striker
Mon Nov 23, 2015 10:30 am
Brezza wrote:To make up the numbers. For Gods sake it's not
Just play 5 in the middle with Gunner Ralls and Witts and Noone and Kennedy out wide supporting Jones and getting crosses into the box supported by one of the 3 central players getting into the box. This means our Fullbacks pushing up more defensively to ensure the midfield is tight. It's not frigging rocket science. We have the players but the system is wrong. You CANNOT play 442 for one simple reason, when the opposition have 5 in the middle against our two ineffective 2 strikers, they win the second ball, which means we always surrender possession - hence the stats. Why can't Slade see this. It's obvious.
Tell me this,what happens if Jones gets injured?... surly you not suggesting Mason as the lone striker