now it makes sense! no it doesnt!

[Rossi 0]

was just reading the ncisa story on leon and i hadnt picked up on something.

leon said a new target man would sit on the bench

surely if we only want a bit part player then it re-ignites the sutton argument - unless of course worthy said no to sutton to get the green cash? no there''s a thought

either way i''m confused. would we really have slashed the cash on either howard or hulse to sit on the bench???????

[Yellow Rages 0]

All a target man would mean is that we would be more likely to play 4-4-2 if required.

[Hucka Hucka Huckerby 0]

The big man for crosses etc could be solved by Etuhu going further forward for set pieces etc & doesn''t have to affect the formation.. However, this does not help if he required to hold the ball up in a Iwan Styley

[Syteanric 1]

if 4-4-2 means dropping the clown that is Carl Robinson then im all for it

jas :)

[Rossi 0]

[quote user="Yellow Rages"]All a target man would mean is that we would be more likely to play 4-4-2 if required.[/quote]

but a lone striker if not!

[blahblahblah 2]

It''s a squad game.  To be able to catch the opposition cold you need to be able to mix it up.  Hence the requirement for a target man as and when needed, but not all the time.

For whatever reason, Worthington has said no to Sutton.  So the argument remains un-ignited.  If that''s a word.

[Yellow Rages 0]

[quote user="Rossi"]

[quote user="Yellow Rages"]All a target man would mean is that we would be more likely to play 4-4-2 if required.[/quote]

but a lone striker if not!

[/quote]

Yes Rossi correct. But seeing as we don''t have a target man at present, the lone striker option is more probable.

I think Mckensie is seen as Earnshaws stand in and not his partner.

A target man would play half the games, Mckensie only if Earnshaw is out.

[Garlic Bread?! 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

if 4-4-2 means dropping the clown that is Carl Robinson then im all for it

jas :)

[/quote]Clown?? Sorry mate but your wrong; Robbo hasnt done too much wrong since the start of the season- dont make him this years hughes.

[Yellow Rages 0]

Agreed.

We should treat Robinson just like all of the other players that were slated last season.

He has done well this season and deserves some credit.

I''ve always said this and I think I have been proved right so far when I maintained that Robinson would look a better player if we passed the ball.

We pass the ball now and he looks a far better player. It''s his game, he''s a player who gets the ball, looks short and lays it off in ten to fifteen yard passes and then looks for the return.

Last season he still did this but the difference was that the player he passed to would then go and hoof a 70 yard ball elsewhere. This left the general man in the stand to say ''Where was Robinson today?'' ''He went missing'' Well, no he didn''t go missing, he just played a game that saw him get very little ball time. You see him get more ball time now because he gets the return because we pass the ball.

Those around him are now doing what he does best.

Having said that, he isn''t the best player in the wrold by any means and he does loose posetion as a result sometimes. All I''m saying is he had the right idea in the first place but he was made to look worse by the style of play we adopted.

[a1canary 0]

   Better still, let''s not have an "Andy Hughes" this year. Except for Andy Hughes himself of course! But he deserves a clean slate just as Dickson, Robbo and Colin are (tentatively) being allowed.

[WestMidlandCanary 0]

Agreed. Last year, I couldn''t rate Colin at all, and I''ve been very pleasantly surprised. Lets hope that Andy Hughes also gets to impress. After all, quite a few players in the past have had torrid first seasons...eh Iwan?

[Syteanric 1]

every time he got the ball against Luton he gave it straight back to them! watch the goals again and see whos fault they are for losing possession.

he''s played for 12 clubs and been released by all them.. we were the only team to pay a fee for him.. says it all. even Wrexham didnt want him.

jas :)

[Yellow Rages 0]

Jas,

I assume you are talking about Robinson looking back up the thread. I guess this because Colin didn''t play for Wrexham and Hughes didn''t play against Luton.

Did he really give the ball away every time he had it? Are you sure? That must be a new record for any player if true. He did give the ball away for one of the Luton goals if that is what you really mean? Not something that hasn''t been done by anyone before really. Not really a basis to suggest he isn''t playing well. I assume that is what you are getting at. We were also very commited forward at that point. Not like he handed the forward the ball in the six yard box.

Hows the newborn anyway? Hope it''s all going well.