maineflyer 0 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Listening to Smith complimenting Lafferty on his work playing alone up front against Milan, I couldn't help thinking that this will be his preferred option against sellick next week. In fact I think Smith would find it easier to pull his own teeth than adopt a reasonably attacking posture against an increasingly impotent sellick. Which is a shame. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,411 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 It will be 4-5-1, of that I have no doubt 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I think Lee McC. will also start.......4-1-4-1 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Really not sure. Lafferty seems to have done well the last couple of games so I've no problem starting him. I've also no problem with 4-5-1 as long as we play personnel capable of supporting whoever plays up front. That means Mendes and Ferguson holding and three more offensive players beside them - preferably Fleck, Naismith and Davis. I like the balance of that side but I think it's more likely to be McCulloch (or Edu) instead of Naismith. My main worry ahead of next week is aggression and physical presence. Robson, Brown and Hartley won't allow us to dominate. We have to be up for that battle. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,411 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Really not sure. Lafferty seems to have done well the last couple of games so I've no problem starting him. I've also no problem with 4-5-1 as long as we play personnel capable of supporting whoever plays up front. That means Mendes and Ferguson holding and three more offensive players beside them - preferably Fleck, Naismith and Davis. I like the balance of that side but I think it's more likely to be McCulloch (or Edu) instead of Naismith. My main worry ahead of next week is aggression and physical presence. Robson, Brown and Hartley won't allow us to dominate. We have to be up for that battle. That's why McCulloch will play mate 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 That's why McCulloch will play mate More than likely... I'd rather play Edu if we must play a 4-5-1. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Edu was very good last night IMO especially as he's not really played many games and has been injured. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Although we were 4-5-1 last night, we played well and I didn't feel it was defensive, and was possible more attacking than many of the 4-4-2 formations that we have seen this season without any width. Certainly nothing like last year's Euro tactics. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,411 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I think most fans would be quite happy with 4-5-1 if played with the correct players,ie wide players with a bit of pace 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Indeed. 4-5-1 doesn't automatically mean negativity. 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.