Right then girls. Next season.

yloop · **Posted:** Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:26 pm

You missed out Foley

bbolt

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22649

F00k off.

Montpoolier · **Posted:** Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:56 pm

So what you're saying is we need two new full backs and a new goalie would also come in handy.
Interesting. :wink:

gremmlin · **Joined:** Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:23 am **Posts:** 3141

keep foley and play him in the middle simple not on the wing

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:16 pm

gremmlin wrote:

keep foley and play him in the middle simple not on the wing

Centre back :wink:

How can you even consider playing someone up front who hasn't scored a goal in 70 football league appearances?

I was of the opinion that he was really promising at the start of this season, but have grew increasingly frustrated with the lad. Time's running out for him to start delivering some end product to his 'running dead fast'.

parmopooly · **Posted:** Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:19 pm

sorry Mr Gremlin, but Foley is about as much use to Pools first team as I am

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:13 pm

Nobodys Hero wrote:

As CT is now in charge.................I reckon we need to do the following:

CT prefers a 5-3-2 Formation.

SO:

Keeper......A new one with ALB as back up.

Back three...........nelson Clark Collins. (Similar to Lee, Westwood Barron)

Right wing back..............Maybe McCunnie, but a new genuine full back would be better.

Left Wing Back................ A new full back defo rquired.

Midfield three..............Liddle and Humhreys..........with Monkhouse the more advanced.

Front two..............Brown and Porter.

So I reckon we need 3 definitely.

We have McCunnie, Sweeney, Barker and Mackay as genuine back up. But I say we need another back up Striker and another central defender.

Go get your men CT. :laugh:

What a load of CODSWALLOP.Lets look at your so called shopping list.

We playing 3-5-2 and need a genuine full back.WHY A genuine full back may not be able to play wing back, it totally different type of play.

A new left back Defo....... See above reference the right back.

As a wing back is supposed to push forward and to be more attacking than a full back and to give a team the width it requires when his team are in possession.

So to reiterate a Wing Back's primary function is to provide support to the attackers.

A full back's primary function is to provide defensive cover.

So if playing 3-5-2- we dont need FULL BACKS.

Can you understand that

mouldy old dough · **Posted:** Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:18 pm

Butz or ALB. Foley. Robson. Mckay. if thats part of our bench next season we are in trouble.

gremmlin · **Joined:** Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:23 am **Posts:** 3141

parmopooly wrote:

sorry Mr Gremlin, but Foley is about as much use to Pools first team as I am

but you can't even run fast :laugh:

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37203

gremmlin wrote:

keep foley and play him in the middle simple not on the wing

...middle of the Deep Water Berth comes to mind. :roll:

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:45 pm

Nobodys Hero wrote:

Fetish_Bob wrote:

What a load of CODSWALLOP.Lets look at your so called shopping list.

We playing 3-5-2 and need a genuine full back.WHY A genuine full back may not be able to play wing back, it totally different type of play.

A new left back Defo....... See above reference the right back.

As a wing back is supposed to push forward and to be more attacking than a full back and to give a team the width it requires when his team are in possession.

So to reiterate a Wing Back's primary function is to provide support to the attackers.

A full back's primary function is to provide defensive cover.

So if playing 3-5-2- we dont need FULL BACKS.

Can you understand that

I suggest its you that doesnt understand.

What the foook is a wing back?

Is Ashley Cole a full back?

Is Gary Neville full back?

Yes they are. Do they get forward. Yes they do.

Was Darren Knowles a full back? And what role did he play at pools when we had 5 at the back?

Case closed. Once again I make mincemeat out of another thats never played the game. :sweeeet:

Case reopened.

Ashley Cole is a full back who gets forward.

Gary Neville is a full back who gets forward.

But they play in a 4-4-2 formation.

Slightly different to a 3-5 -2 formation and just so you know

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 197076.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 197002.stm

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:52 pm

When Verry Terribles had England playing 3-5-2 at Euro 96 who did he use as the "wing backs" then in order to give us the fluency and threat going forward?

And when the Wally with the Brolly tried a similar formation in his botched attempt at qualifying for Euro 08 who did he employ as "wing backs" leading to us sitting too deep, offering nowt going forward and effectively playing with a back five?

Montpoolier · **Posted:** Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:06 pm

To read those BBC definitions you'd believe wing backs never ever needed to defend.
But if they didn't, they wouldn't be wing backs any more, would they; they'd be wingers.
So I suggest maybe the writer has got his definitions mixed up somewhere along the line.
Mind, he does go on to say, talking about full backs, "They play an important role in supporting their team's own attack by pushing forward to supply crosses."

I think any attempt to differentiate between the two is just nitpicking. If a full back plays wing back his brief is to push forward more often; that's all there is to it.
If he is too thick to understand that, well, that's a different story Ripper.

Right then girls. Next season.

Gadgies online