Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
I wouldn’t be so convinced. Burn at left back makes zero sense.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] There is ZERO chance of SIGNING anyone today.
- Thread starter Bladders
- Start date
I wouldn’t be so convinced. Burn at left back makes zero sense.
blockhseagull
Well-known member
Possibly
My first reaction was 3 at the back... however I’ve never known that team list to ever not be in positional order.
I’d love us to play 3 at the back... but we don’t have the players for it
Agreed, wingbacks I reckon. Been suggesting that would be Solly's best position for AGES - this afternoon I get shot down in flames [emoji23][emoji23]
Sent from my H8314 using Tapatalk
Albumen
Don't wait for me!
Just seen Maupay not in the Brentford squad. He's going somewhere.
Stumpy Tim
Well-known member
We'll see in 20 minutes
B.W.
New member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 13,666
Again, I genuinely apologise for offence, but a licker in this context is a club (ar$e) licker... nothing else... I really am not the person some are portraying here... happy to take flak on my recruitment views and will give as good as I get, but to say I am akin to a racist or homophobe is well wide of the mark...
lizard
Well-hung member
- Jul 14, 2005
- 3,332
Villa hopefully...
blockhseagull
Well-known member
True... I wish we had the players to play it .. sadly we don’t
Stumpy Tim
Well-known member
I do see your point in relation to the team sheet, but I doubt Pottet sat down with the people responsible and explained the formation. Under Hughton it was obvious who would play where, but this regime will be very different.
I definitely disagree on the players. I think our players are actually better suited to this
B.W.
New member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 13,666
oooh interesting...
B.W.
New member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 13,666
Hopefully to us...
blockhseagull
Well-known member
Montoya isn’t !!
He doesn’t have the discipline required .... IF we sign a right back who is suitable then it’s a possibility but right now it doesn’t sit well with the personnel we have.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
It’s why he’s better suited at right wing back. He doesn’t need to be quite as disciplined.
I can’t think of a formation which suits us better than this one.
blockhseagull
Well-known member
But he needs to be good going forward !! Montoya isn’t ... he isn’t great at crossing, he isn’t able to go past players ... he isn’t a goal threat
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
Which are all very different things to discipline. You’ve also picked one specific player it may not suit better than 4-4-2. instead of the squad.
lizard
Well-hung member
- Jul 14, 2005
- 3,332
£20M for a forth choice striker. The world's a crazy place. No thanks.
blockhseagull
Well-known member
Yes because my point was that we need to sign someone for that position. It probably does suit as better as a squad but we still need someone capable in every position.
Plus you DO need discipline as a wingback... you have to get back and defend and track back
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
Who else doesn’t suit 3-5-2? Montoya arguably won’t be playing there in our current squad anyway. Bernardo is nailed on for LWB and as March usually plays on the right he probably will be there instead of Montoya.
blockhseagull
Well-known member
March plays on the left normally ... I didn’t say it didn’t suit anyone else did I
The only other player I think that needs to be replaced is Stephens but that’s nothing to do with the formation and more him fitting into the style of how we play
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
Silly played about 50/50 between left and right last season (https://www.whoscored.com/Players/122926/Show/Solly-March) - for some reason I remembered him more on the right.
You said we didn’t have the players for it - Not sure how not having the players for it can be interpreted by anything other than the majority of the squad.