Shrimpsvoices

I would go with this line up tomorrow - roche adams bentley mcstay artell yates hunter drummond twiss howe ocarroll subs edge mcclachlan taylor duffy parrish (if curtis is fit play him instead of ocarroll) we need at least 4 points from next two games to take it to the last game asking a lot but possible - last games of season include chesterfield v bradford and dagenham v shrewsbury - whatever happens its been a great season

Howe Magic wrote:I would go with this line up tomorrow - roche adams bentley mcstay artell yates hunter drummond twiss howe ocarroll subs edge mcclachlan taylor duffy parrish (if curtis is fit play him instead of ocarroll

Same but with Duffy in for McStay.

Maybe play duffy in the wainwright role depends how sammy approaches the match

Howe Magic wrote:Maybe play duffy in the wainwright role depends how sammy approaches the match

I think that what he'll go for. We have a lack of wide players really. Who else is there who can play in the left wing back role?

Howe Magic wrote:Maybe play duffy in the wainwright role depends how sammy approaches the match

I noticed when Duffy came on on Saturday he was doing a lot of tracking back, almost as if in preparation for a proper go at playing wingback, whereas his previous games seem to have been as out and out winger.

After a full 45 and a goal I think Duffs would be disappointed not to get a start.

shrimper wrote:

Howe Magic wrote:Maybe play duffy in the wainwright role depends how sammy approaches the match

I noticed when Duffy came on on Saturday he was doing a lot of tracking back, almost as if in preparation for a proper go at playing wingback, whereas his previous games seem to have been as out and out winger.

After a full 45 and a goal I think Duffs would be disappointed not to get a start.

I partly agree, although don't really see Duffy as a wing back. He's still learning and wing back against a side who should be in the automatic places but for points deductions would be a bit foolhardy I think. If Duffy starts, I think we should go 4-4-2. If not, play Parrish at wing back initially, and perhaps put Duffy on at half time.

Number 1 wrote:[
I partly agree, although don't really see Duffy as a wing back. He's still learning and wing back against a side who should be in the automatic places but for points deductions would be a bit foolhardy I think. .

Absolutely agree - but maybe we have to take a risk or two and his trickery may unlock a tight defence.

Can't argue with that. I suppose Sammy has to decide whether to stick or twist to a certain extent.

Or should that be stick or Twiss?

I'd rather have a man slightly out of position than change the formation that we've played in throughout our fantastic run. I see the 3 man centre defence as the core of our team and if we stretch the back line out, we'll be exposing ourself to pacey attacks that the better sides in this league tend to prefer.

.......................1.roche......................................

2.yates...........5.bentley.....23.mcstay........25.adams


18.duffy......16.drummond....6.stanley.........9.curtis


.........7.twiss...............10.howe............

am gonna go for a 2-2 draw

with us being 2-0 down at half time, and stanners to pull 1 back , then howe scores a leveler in injury time!! suppose we"d take a point .

Stanners is still out, isn't he?

Think so yes James.

From what we have seen of Duffy i would say defending is not his strong point, and if Wayne is unavailable then i would be inclined to go with a 4-4-2.

.................................................Roche.............................................

Yates.................Artell.................................Bentley.......................Adams

Duffy..................Hunter...............................Drummond......................Twiss

...........................Howe...............................O'Carroll

one defeat in 17... the vast majority of those games with a 5-3-2 or 3-5-2 which ever way you interpret it, why are members of this board expecting us to line up 4-4-2 tomorrow!!!

shrimper wrote:After a full 45 and a goal I think Duffs would be disappointed not to get a start.

Thought he was going to explode after he scored that, Sammy gave him a big old cuddle He knows he scored 2 really

I think we will be suited by the running track unless Sammy takes a foghorn with him

After thinking about it, I reckon Sammy may go with this:

Roche,



Yates Artell, Bentley, Adams, Twiss

Hunter, Drummond, McLachlan

Howe, O'Carroll

shrimper wrote:After thinking about it, I reckon Sammy may go with this:

Roche,



Yates Artell, Bentley, Adams, Twiss

Hunter, Drummond, McLachlan

Howe, O'Carroll

Id happily see that. If we started Duffy we'd have no real impact player or plan B to throw on. We must be struggling for subs tonight. who've we got; Mcstay, Parrish, Edge, Taylor, and Who else Bell?? It may be a case of Artell pushed up in a creative role after 80mins

Personally I thought O' Carroll's first touch all through Notts Co. game was poor, my line up, assumin Curtis is OK would be

Roche: Adams, Bentley, Artell: Yates, Duffy, Drummond, Hunter, Twiss: Curtis, Howe.

O'Carroll replacing Curtis if he's out.

Formula is simple really, Take all the remaining 9 points available and hope that Shrews slip up. Daggers have Brentford tonight I think...who ought to be favourites. We've then got to hope that D&R do us a favour beating Shrews. All very tight and exciting.

Bradford_Shrimp wrote:Formula is simple really, Take all the remaining 9 points available and hope that Shrews slip up. Daggers have Brentford tonight I think...who ought to be favourites. We've then got to hope that D&R do us a favour beating Shrews. All very tight and exciting.

If we win all our three matches, it doesn't matter what Dagenham and Shrewsbury do so long as they draw with each other.

If we win all our three matches, it doesn't matter what Dagenham and Shrewsbury do so long as they draw with each other

True enough. I mean a draw could be a slip up in that it's not 3 points...

i realy dont care what formation or squad we play. As long as McLachlen doesnt start OR come on as a sub. Such a bad player!

Sharpy - why have you got a downer on mcclachlan he is a good league two player who as come back from a terrible injury give the lad a break (pardon the pun)

james456 wrote:I'd rather have a man slightly out of position than change the formation that we've played in throughout our fantastic run. I see the 3 man centre defence as the core of our team and if we stretch the back line out, we'll be exposing ourself to pacey attacks that the better sides in this league tend to prefer.

i agree, id play Parrish for Wainwright, and upfront alongside R Howe id play Duffy for his pace, he can cause mayhem


oh and then Twissy in midfield with Drummond & Hunter

he was average at best before the leg. He is not a competent league 2 player. we dont need him anyway. Drummond, Stanners, Hunter are far better players.

Sharpy wrote:he was average at best before the leg. He is not a competent league 2 player. we dont need him anyway. Drummond, Stanners, Hunter are far better players.

I think McLachlan is a decent squad player at the very least. And its not like we have too many midfielders on our books. At the moment, we have only 2 other proper centre mids available.

I've criticised him for his poor distribution but so long as he keeps it simple and continues to work hard, he's a valuable player. Players like McLachlan are vital to winning the midfield battle.