Gribz 743 Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 I think what SA is meaning is, if we draw with a team 0-0 and they dont have a single effort on goal then it wouldnt make a difference if we had Cech, McGreggor or Stevie Wonder in goals because obviously that isnt the problem, its the fact we arent creating/scoring. Our defence isnt struggling badly enough to warrant having Hemdni sitting in front of them for protection. I can understand that but we didnt draw 0-0, we drew 1-1 and if we prevented that goal then we would have won the match. Its hypothetical but Hemdani's style could have prevented the goal. On Saturday, i think our main problem was not creating enough chances, IMO Hemdani would not have changed that, if anything he would have made matters worse (again this is just my opinion) because he would have taken away a more "forward thinking" midfielder. But who would Hemdani have taken away? Thomson - he isnt forward thinking at all. Or he could have taken Whittaker away, pushed Hutton further forward. There is many things he could have done. At the moment WS is relying on the wide players to create the chances and possibly Ferguson. But Ferguson is neither a defensive midfielder or attacking midfielder - which is frustrating. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.B. 0 Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 I can understand that but we didnt draw 0-0, we drew 1-1 and if we prevented that goal then we would have won the match. Its hypothetical but Hemdani's style could have prevented the goal. But who would Hemdani have taken away? Thomson - he isnt forward thinking at all. Or he could have taken Whittaker away, pushed Hutton further forward. There is many things he could have done. At the moment WS is relying on the wide players to create the chances and possibly Ferguson. But Ferguson is neither a defensive midfielder or attacking midfielder - which is frustrating. I did actually say a "more" forward thinking player, and Thomson is more forward thinking than Hemdani. I dont think you can argue with that. I know your a big fan of 3 at the back mate but i dont think we should be messing with our defence just now, we want them as settled as possible, Whittaker should be dropped for a few games with Novo taking his place. On another point, am i the only one who thought Beasley was a lot more of a threat than McCulloch on the left when he came on? im not Beasley's biggest fan but i think he gives us a better attcking option on the left, might mean moving big Lee over to the right. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 I know your a big fan of 3 at the back mate but i dont think we should be messing with our defence just now, we want them as settled as possible, Whittaker should be dropped for a few games with Novo taking his place. On another point, am i the only one who thought Beasley was a lot more of a threat than McCulloch on the left when he came on? im not Beasley's biggest fan but i think he gives us a better attcking option on the left, might mean moving big Lee over to the right. I wouldnt go 3 at the back at the moment due to Hutton being amazing at RB and the defence is overall settled. But yeah, Novo for RM. As for McCulloch, I thought he was doing better when he was playing RM aswell until Smith shifted him. Beasley likes to run more with the ball and he is a bit more of a threat with the ball at feet. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share Posted October 1, 2007 I'm glad a coupel can see the point i'm trying to make. And I would have had Whittaker dropped for the last coupel of games. The lack of a real pre-season is maybe what's hurting him, regardless he needs a rest. As I've read elsewhere, Wlater trying to let him play through a bad patch is not working out. Agree to re: Beasley, really impressed me for once. About 10 secs before the pen I mentioned he needed to do more with the ball at his feet. I'll try and talk him through every game. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 If you look at thing as always being a straight line then Hemdani in himself would not have made an attacking difference. If you look at it from another view point then he would have made a difference in my eyes. The fact is if you don't have the ball you cannot attack. Hemdani is out on his own when it comes to breaking down attacking moves from the other team and seldom gives it away. Based then on the fact we probably would have had more of the ball,and with Fergie and Thomson able to go to more advanced positions then it may have made a difference. Personally i would go with Hemdani,Fergie and Thomson all playing with Nacho\Naismith and McCulloch\Beasley forming a 4-5-1 \4-3-3 formation. Whittaker needs a break to help him settle in. I would have Darcheville up front in this system. As has been said no one will know if this would have made a difference but i don't think we would have been over-run in midfield as we were, 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.