harry94 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Btw for home games against teams we should beat, 4-3-3 with a front 3 of Mcormack, Rhodes and Griffiths would be tremendous, so much talent and so many goals there, night and day from 10 years ago. That really wouldn't work. It's not a game of fifa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Out of interest, it seems there are some rumblings of a move: http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/10419919.Blackburn_Rovers_striker_Jordan_Rhodes__worth_at_least___10m_/ Hull City is probably not the lad's best option though! Why Hull have a very good midfield,he will get chances.Can see Hull staying up no problem,especially if they sign him and his predatory goal scoring instincts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjembaDjemba Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 That really wouldn't work. It's not a game of fifa. I didn't say it was, or ask if you agreed. That's a tremendous front 3 with balance and quality. This place tires me out, debating with children who have no clue is very draining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidan-bufc Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 He's fantastic, quite a few premiership clubs could do a lot worse than come in for him this month, though personally I think he would be as well to finish the season where he is then go to the premiership in the summer. He is very close to 150 career goals and not yet 24, outstanding player. Btw for home games against teams we should beat, 4-3-3 with a front 3 of Mcormack, Rhodes and Griffiths would be tremendous, so much talent and so many goals there, night and day from 10 years ago. Stevie Fletcher? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjembaDjemba Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 what about him? He is our first choice I just like the look of that 3 together would like to see it tried in the right games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I didn't say it was, or ask if you agreed. You are on a public forum, do you have a brick wall you would rather engage in discussion with instead? Retaining possession is so important in international football these days. Most countries focus on their defensive game first as they have little coherence as their players play together so rarely. To set out three forwards like that (who are atrocious at retaining possession) is suicidal. We have good wingers in Ikechi Anya and Robert Snodgrass who do good work defensively and then Steven Naismith is a great hard worker and easily our most skilled forward. Griffiths isn't made for that level unfortunately, Rhodes maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjembaDjemba Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I just can't be bothered with clowns who dismiss things out of hand as if they have some insight the rest of us don't. Its all relative, there is no being made for 'that level', it depends who you are up against for a place, so both will be involved and both already have been. You make no pertinent point, if you had said something about lack of width I might have given you 30 seconds of a serious reply about fullbacks giving that, apart from that its all nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 You are on a public forum, do you have a brick wall you would rather engage in discussion with instead? Retaining possession is so important in international football these days. Most countries focus on their defensive game first as they have little coherence as their players play together so rarely. To set out three forwards like that (who are atrocious at retaining possession) is suicidal. We have good wingers in Ikechi Anya and Robert Snodgrass who do good work defensively and then Steven Naismith is a great hard worker and easily our most skilled forward. Griffiths isn't made for that level unfortunately, Rhodes maybe. Well our under 21 team beat Holland last year using 4 3 3,so its not as crazy as it sounds.It depends ho you use it,be in the 4 3 3 when attacking,and 4 5 1 in defending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Well our under 21 team beat Holland last year using 4 3 3,so its not as crazy as it sounds.It depends ho you use it,be in the 4 3 3 when attacking,and 4 5 1 in defending. Under 21 level is hugely different. To be honest it doesn't really matter what formation you are using, it depends on how much freedom is given to the players within it. Of Rhodes, Griffiths and McCormack I can not see how Rhodes or Griffiths would bring others into the game. That's the biggest problem with it. Maybe if you were to swap Griffiths with Snodgrass and allow him to roam a bit more but it's way too much of a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjembaDjemba Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Way too much of a risk for what? This is what I mean speaking as if you know something the rest of us don't. If you read back you'll find I said against teams we are expected to beat and at home, its no risk at all. Griffiths is also extremely hard working and Mcormack a very mature and intelligent player nowadays. It has great potential, good players can always play together, they are 3 very good players who would compliment each other very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Way too much of a risk for what? This is what I mean speaking as if you know something the rest of us don't. If you read back you'll find I said against teams we are expected to beat and at home, its no risk at all. Griffiths is also extremely hard working and Mcormack a very mature and intelligent player nowadays. It has great potential, good players can always play together, they are 3 very good players who would compliment each other very well. Griffiths is hard working but he's way too wasteful and not intelligent enough to play international football. There aren't any teams that we play at home and will beat that comfortably anymore. Lichtenstein is a good example of that; Miller, Boyd and McFadden all started in that game and it went to shit because they sat deep and held onto the ball for long periods while a huge gap between our midfield and attack emerged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Under 21 level is hugely different. To be honest it doesn't really matter what formation you are using, it depends on how much freedom is given to the players within it. Of Rhodes, Griffiths and McCormack I can not see how Rhodes or Griffiths would bring others into the game. That's the biggest problem with it. Maybe if you were to swap Griffiths with Snodgrass and allow him to roam a bit more but it's way too much of a risk.How is it any different?All the players are sent out to win with jobs to do.Griffiths got left out for a reason.And was way of the mark against Belguim.Why would we use him when we have Fletcher anyway?Fletcher is the best headerer of a ball we have.Plus he has great first touch and has technical ability.Would love him in behind Rhodes in a 4 4 1 1,if we get braver in games.And decide we can play without the protection of the sitting defensive midfielders.We can play with them against the tougher teams.When we are expected to come up against quality strikers,were winning the midfield battle is the key to win.As we will always make chances and have the players to get goals,Or even a goal to sneak it bye the odd goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 How is it any different?All the players are sent out to win with jobs to do.Griffiths got left out for a reason.And was way of the mark against Belguim.Why would we use him when we have Fletcher anyway?Fletcher is the best headerer of a ball we have.Plus he has great first touch and has technical ability.Would love him in behind Rhodes in a 4 4 1 1,if we get braver in games.And decide we can play without the protection of the sitting defensive midfielders.We can play with them against the tougher teams.When we are expected to come up against quality strikers,were winning the midfield battle is the key to win.As we will always make chances and have the players to get goals,Or even a goal to sneak it bye the odd goal. I was addressing the comment about a front three of Griffiths, Rhodes and McCormack that you appeared to endorse...Why do you think I'd prefer him to Fletcher? At under 21 level there is a much much bigger difference in competitive levels between footballing and non footballing countries. There is also a much different focus at that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I was addressing the comment about a front three of Griffiths, Rhodes and McCormack that you appeared to endorse...Why do you think I'd prefer him to Fletcher? At under 21 level there is a much much bigger difference in competitive levels between footballing and non footballing countries. There is also a much different focus at that level. I never endosed anything just the system.And your wrong about international under 21 games.Other teams play capped players to win those games can think of Iceland and England doing so.Who had many full internationals in there sides to beat us.Its only us that do not seem to take that level seriosly.And keep players that could play in those games in our squad,who sometimes do not even get a chance to play and sit on the bench.Its bad when we cant get to finals even at that level.When historicly its a level that our younger teams done well in during the past.And were more succesful than the senior team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I was addressing the comment about a front three of Griffiths, Rhodes and McCormack that you appeared to endorse...Why do you think I'd prefer him to Fletcher? At under 21 level there is a much much bigger difference in competitive levels between footballing and non footballing countries. There is also a much different focus at that level. I never endosed anything just the system.And your wrong about international under 21 games.Other teams play capped players to win those games can think of Iceland and England doing so.Who had many full internationals in there sides to beat us.Its only us that do not seem to take that level seriosly.And keep players that could play in those games in our squad,who sometimes do not even get a chance to play and sit on the bench.Its bad when we cant get to finals even at that level.When historicly its a level that our younger teams done well in during the past.And were more succesful than the senior team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordopolis Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Stevie Fletcher? Currently he's probably our best candidate based on the fact he's scored 10-12 goals in the EPL for a few seasons running. But for how long should we automatically throw him the No. 9 jersey? He looks like he's struggling to make a difference for Sunderland this season, having only scored a couple and rarely looking like a goal threat. My concern is that almost every time I have seen him play for Scotland he has looked equally average. I'm not anti-Fletcher, but I don't like this assumption that he is our first pick without debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Currently he's probably our best candidate based on the fact he's scored 10-12 goals in the EPL for a few seasons running. But for how long should we automatically throw him the No. 9 jersey? He looks like he's struggling to make a difference for Sunderland this season, having only scored a couple and rarely looking like a goal threat. My concern is that almost every time I have seen him play for Scotland he has looked equally average. I'm not anti-Fletcher, but I don't like this assumption that he is our first pick without debate. Again definatly not having that one.Dont know how many times you have watch Sunderland this year,but he always looks a when I watch them.And remember he has had stop start injuries to deal with this season.So might not be in 100 per cent condition.Anyway he brings more to the team than just goals.Fletcher brings others into the game and has a dogged defensive side to his game as well,that nobody seems to highlight.Maybe pair him with Phillips,his flick ons would complement his lightning pace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry94 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I never endosed anything just the system.And your wrong about international under 21 games.Other teams play capped players to win those games can think of Iceland and England doing so.Who had many full internationals in there sides to beat us.Its only us that do not seem to take that level seriosly.And keep players that could play in those games in our squad,who sometimes do not even get a chance to play and sit on the bench.Its bad when we cant get to finals even at that level.When historicly its a level that our younger teams done well in during the past.And were more succesful than the senior team. You quoted the post talking about using that front three and that implies to me that it was an endorsement. They play to win but they won't always do it in what seems natural to the players they have at their disposal (e.g. Germany, Spain, Netherlands.) We do quite well in the younger age groups because we tend to just go for a win at all costs and focus on physical attributes, in a few years time though that is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dryhorce Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 You quoted the post talking about using that front three and that implies to me that it was an endorsement. They play to win but they won't always do it in what seems natural to the players they have at their disposal (e.g. Germany, Spain, Netherlands.) We do quite well in the younger age groups because we tend to just go for a win at all costs and focus on physical attributes, in a few years time though that is irrelevant. Well your wrong I am happy with the shape of the team and the formation was at the Croatia game.And its the best we have played in twenty odd years,it worked out a dream.Would like to see some tweeks though like Fletcher wide left.So Rhodes could come in and we do not lose our shape.And still have two strikers on the pitch.And a aerial edge that even WGS says we lack,its why Mulgrew went into midfield.Nothing wrong with 4 3 3 though against the smaller teams,as long as they knew the system.Its really a 4 5 1 anyway when we lose the ball,and 4 3 3 in attack.Its easy to play and counter attack,especially if we had Adam and Bannan in the same side who have vision to pick out the passses and even switch play fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandabear Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 dryhorce, just stop yer pish please. Adam should be nowhere near the Scotland team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.