Could see us without both Brown and Kyle, which leaves us short upfront.

Now as we are allowed seven subs on the bench,Im going to, put forward something for discussion, Im not advocatating it but just feel it may be an option.

Wilson plays Humphreys, yes I said Humphreys up front alongside Porter if Brown and Kyle are unavailable. It was his original position, and yes ,under Turner he didn't have a good scoring record when he played there.

Foley, Mackay are not the answer and a win may well make us some much needed money, from a good 3rd round draw.

Now some will laugh, even I did when I thought about it, but it's an option, and after last night we need something different.Whether that is a totally different formation, possibly 3-5-2 or different personnel in a 4-4-2 is also open to debate, but I'm a great lover of 4-4-2 so I will give this team for discussion for Saturday.

ALB ( I even considered Cook, after ALB's walkabout for Bristol's goal last night)

McCunnie
Nelson
Collins
Liddle

Sweeney
Jones
Clark
Robson

Porter
Humphreys

Subs
One of other Keepers
Rowell
Mackay
Monkhouse
Tait
Power
Foley

The main point of the post, though, is really to discuss whether with the loss of the two players mentioned is

WOULD ANYONE PLAY HUMPHREYS UPFRONT ON SATURDAY ?

Nope - I'd play Porter and Mackay up front...

That's an interesting one - it's the kind of thing Turner may have tried but I don't think Wilson would. What about Monkhouse up front?

Porter and Mackaey (or however you spell it)

ALB walkabout?

The defence was caught square and he had to make some effort to get to the man and narrow the angle.

Or is there some new coaching theory that says keepers should stay rooted to their line when a forward gets through one on one?

I'm sure it would tell them not to go to ground as early as possible so they make up the striker's mind for them, and simply go around the outstretched arms and stick it into the empty net.
Dimi could save a high percentage of these situations, as can other keepers in this league (and the one below, and the one below that, and the one below that etc). Once they are through on goal against Pools, it IS a goal, and that has to be down to the keeper to some extent.

To be fair it was right in front of us (in the posh seats) and I just think that the lad took it well.

regardless of how well taken or not - once the situation arises, all hope is lost though, isn't it?

No. ALB has saved a few of those this season.

I normally concur with you but I reckon ALB was partly at fault for the goal last night. He hesitated and it left him in no mans land. Had he stayed on his line or come for the ball committed it may well have prevented the goal.

On the subject of playing Humphreys up front I think this would be a bad move.

(a) It would be a huge kick in the gonads to Mackay/Foley

(b) Humphreys does ok as a left back against a poorer standard of opposition, ie division 2 so he should be able to cope ok with Fleetwood.

If the defence hadn't been split open so easily that would have prevented the goal too.

Just an idea like, some will agree, some won't

ALB

Clark
Nelson
Collins
Humphreys

Sweeney
Jones
Liddle
Robson

Porter
Monkhouse

I reckon this team would see us through to the 3rd round.

Any bastid team we put out should beat Fleetwood.

If we get beat there'll be hell on

I'd be tempted with something like this (with Sweeney a definite starter in one or the other position);

GK- Lee-Barrett
RB- Sweeney or McCunnie
LB- Liddle
CB- Nelson or Collins
CB- Clark
RM- Monkhouse or Sweeney
LM- Robson
CM- Jones
CM- Humphreys or Power
CF- Porter
CF- Mackay