Sunderland Without Virgo

[Stumpy Tim]

MM has suggested that he may change formation this weekend with Virgo out & Cullip, Oatway & Nicholas back. He's talking about a back 3 with wing-backs? I quite like the idea for this one game, as Sunderland are pretty direct. That way we can give Currie a free-role behind Knight & play

GK - FDM
RWB - El-Abd
CB - Hinsh
CB - Butters
CD - Cullip
LWB - Harding
CM - Hammond
CM - Nicholas
CM - Chippy
Free Role - Currie
CF - Knight

Any thoughts?

 

[fatboy]

Any thoughts?

Yes.

I don't like it.

We should stick to the 4-4-2 that we are used to.

Play Robinson up front or another makeshift striker.

 

[Scarface]

Sounds interesting. Think Harding would be quite good as a wingback, maybe OGH on the right?

 

[Knightsworld]

No way 4-4-2 its got to be.

Don't change what is working.

 

[Lammy]

*ahem* Mcphee?

 

[Stumpy Tim]

*ahem* Mcphee?

Why the *ahem*? Call me contreversial but I don't believe playing an injured forward is going to help

 

[Uncle Buck]

*ahem* Mcphee?

*ahem* injured.

 

[CHAPPERS]

If we are playing that formation I'd go with the same formation as you Stumps. Looks okay but I'd rather Hammond play in the hole I think.

 

[Ding Dong !]

I'd try a 3-5-2 ( 2 wing backs ) formation for this game only and see what happens. Nothing ventured.......

 

[Tom Bombadil]

If we are playing that formation I'd go with the same formation as you Stumps.

I agree, if we are going to play that formation then the only option is the same formation

 

[Lammy]

*ahem* sorry I thought he was fit now? didn't he play 90mins alongside Chippy not so long back?

 

[Del Boy]

Re: Re: Sunderland Without Virgo

Yes.

I don't like it.

We should stick to the 4-4-2 that we are used to.

Play Robinson up front or another makeshift striker.

Snap!

Should play Robinson, Molonga or chuck Hart up there (although I think he is suspended)!

 

[Scarface]

Remember the last gamble McGhee took? Worked out quite well didn't it!

 

[n1 gull]

4,4,2 and put Hinshlewood up front

 

[pasty]

According to the Argus last night MM was going to choose between Jake or Meheta after watching them in the reserves this afternoon.

 

[BensGrandad]

I posted this suggestion on the injured players thread earlier today. The only difference that I would make is Carpenter, Nicholas Currie in midfield as I am not impressed with Hammond I believe that he gives the ball away too easily and misses too many tackles.

Kuiper

Hinshlewood
Cullip
Butters

El Abd wingbacks
Harding

Carpenter
Nicholas
Currie

Knight
Robinson

Subs:

Hammond
Hart
Jones
Jarrett
May

 

[larus]

Give it a go.

Makes us stronger at the back with 3 C/Backs.

El-Abd & Harding are both young enough to have the legs to go at it for 90 minutes (if required).

Solves the problem about Hammond/Nicholas being center midfield.

Give Currie a free-roll. Like the sound of that.

If it ain't working, then we can change it about. MM seems fairly shrewd, and as Ding, Dong says, what have we got to lose.

 

[larus]

I posted this suggestion on the injured players thread earlier today. The only difference that I would make is Carpenter, Nicholas Currie in midfield as I am not impressed with Hammond I believe that he gives the ball away too easily and misses too many tackles.

Have to disagree with you oin that one BensGrandad.

Hammond has been excellent in the last few games. Very good distribution IMHO. Would not want to see him left out at the moment.

 

[Saint Lennard]

If we are playing that formation I'd go with the same formation as you Stumps. Looks okay but I'd rather Hammond play in the hole I think.

What rather than Charlie digging a hole (for himself, of course).

 

[Virgo's Haircut]

I'd go for...

(GK) Kuipers
(RB) Hinshelwood
(LB) Harding
(CD) Cullip
(CD) Butters
(RM) Hart
(LM) Jones
(CM) Carpenter
(CM) Nicolas
(AM) Currie
(CF) Knight

Subs - May, El-Adb, Oatway, Jarrett, Robinson