McNamee for Swindon?

[Beauseant 0]

First of all I''d be gobsmacked if Lambert changed the side next week, barring illness or injury. It''s just not his style,and who can argue?

I think that yesterday''s result has deflected attention away from Huddersfield domination of the first half ( I wasn''t there, but it seemed that way on the radio and all reports seem to confirm it) as  a result of their wingers having lots of possession and running at Rose and Russell. This is the big weakness of the diamond as it doesn''t provide width and if the opposition can bypass central midfield and get the ball wide early they can cause you problems, which is what seemed to happen. The attraction of having McNamee in that situation is the opposing winger can''t attack with total freedom because any fullback left one on one with Macca is likely to struggle, in addition to which the fullback can''t go on the overlap leaving him unattended. If that seems like an anti diamond, pro 442 argument it isn''t meant to be, because no one system is superior, as was demonstrated in the second half when we upped our game. Teams win by reacting to the opponents system and countering it, something Lambert is particularly good at.

 

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

First of all I''d be gobsmacked if Lambert changed the side next week, barring illness or injury. It''s just not his style,and who can argue?

I think that yesterday''s result has deflected attention away from Huddersfield domination of the first half ( I wasn''t there, but it seemed that way on the radio and all reports seem to confirm it) as  a result of their wingers having lots of possession and running at Rose and Russell. This is the big weakness of the diamond as it doesn''t provide width and if the opposition can bypass central midfield and get the ball wide early they can cause you problems, which is what seemed to happen. The attraction of having McNamee in that situation is the opposing winger can''t attack with total freedom because any fullback left one on one with Macca is likely to struggle, in addition to which the fullback can''t go on the overlap leaving him unattended. If that seems like an anti diamond, pro 442 argument it isn''t meant to be, because no one system is superior, as was demonstrated in the second half when we upped our game. Teams win by reacting to the opponents system and countering it, something Lambert is particularly good at.

 

[/quote]Personally I feel the problem with the diamond, at present, is Drury''s absence.  I''ve not been too impressed with Rose, although by all accounts he had a better game yesterday, but think that Drury has that extra ability to get forward and provide width in attack, as well as being more solid in defence.  He also seems to work well with Lappin.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Beauseant"]

First of all I''d be gobsmacked if Lambert changed the side next week, barring illness or injury. It''s just not his style,and who can argue?

I think that yesterday''s result has deflected attention away from Huddersfield domination of the first half ( I wasn''t there, but it seemed that way on the radio and all reports seem to confirm it) as  a result of their wingers having lots of possession and running at Rose and Russell. This is the big weakness of the diamond as it doesn''t provide width and if the opposition can bypass central midfield and get the ball wide early they can cause you problems, which is what seemed to happen. The attraction of having McNamee in that situation is the opposing winger can''t attack with total freedom because any fullback left one on one with Macca is likely to struggle, in addition to which the fullback can''t go on the overlap leaving him unattended. If that seems like an anti diamond, pro 442 argument it isn''t meant to be, because no one system is superior, as was demonstrated in the second half when we upped our game. Teams win by reacting to the opponents system and countering it, something Lambert is particularly good at.

 

[/quote]
Personally I feel the problem with the diamond, at present, is Drury''s absence.  I''ve not been too impressed with Rose, although by all accounts he had a better game yesterday, but think that Drury has that extra ability to get forward and provide width in attack, as well as being more solid in defence.  He also seems to work well with Lappin.
[/quote]

That''s very true. Drury and Lappin seem to have an innate understanding of each other''s game, whereas Lappin and Rose had a little contretemps yesterday which suggests that all is not well between them.

[7rew 0]

For me part of the reason the full backs struggled yesterday was that the pitch at Huddersfield is very wide. This was much more the cause than the huddersfield fullbacks overlapping, which wasn''t excessively evident.

[Webbo118 0]

I never cease to be amazed by some (a lot) of the things that I read on here. We have just come through what was universally regarded as our most difficult remaining game of the season against a team unbeaten at home. We concede an early goal and show great resilience and character to come back and get the three points. What reaction does this produce?

1)  General comments that we are in a rubbish division, playing rubbish teams who we should defeat easily.                                   

2)  Criticism of the team selected by the Manager, e.g. "I would have played Mcnamee".

3) The apparent choice of Simon Lappin as current Club scapegoat. No doubt the usual sheep will soon be climbing on to this bandwagon.

Take nothing for granted and please do not easily forget. Remember where we were some 6 months ago. It looked far more likely then for us to be heading to Division 4 than the Championship. I consider that we are in an extremely fortunate position. Through luck, judgment, skill or a combination of all three, we have acquired an extremely talented Manager who has played the game at a high level and, unusually, appears also to be blessed with excellent managerial and motivational skills. I would much prefer to place my trust in him than to give voice to my own individual prejudices (we all have them) about certain players. The criticism evident on this Forum really serves no useful purpose at all. 

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Canary_on_the Trent"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="King Korey"]Am i not the only one who thought Lappin was lethargical with his play yesterday? Didn''t seem to put his foot in for the cause. One prime example was when the ball became loose towards his wing. He could of sprinted and got it, but was lazy and Huddersfield countered and could of easily scored.[/quote]Can''t really comment mate... it sounds from the radio commentary that Lappin had one of his better games in many months yesterday and he obviously set up our 3rd goal.However, with regards to him closing down players and winning tackles in games I have sen little evidence of this over the course of the games I have attended this season.  This is one of the main reasons (along with the quality of the opposition) that I am convinced we would not be losing out on much by dropping Lappin for McNamee and that we would not be left short defensively any more than we are already.For me those who point to McNamee''s shortfalls defensively have been unable to provide any evidence as to the number of tackles that Lappin wins per game and few have admitted that by playing McNamee it forces the opposition to sit very deep down his side of the pitch - which has a positive impact on our defensive capabilities as a team in itself. [/quote]

It''s not just tackles that show how much defensive work is done, the number of times Lappin gets back and doubles up with Rose/Drury or closes down a player in the midfield preventing a pass or shot is inbvaluable to the team. I could be mistaken but I think Lappin made a key challenge as a Huddersfield was running into our box at 1-1 or 2-1 yesterdy, don''t think he won the ball but it certainly prevented a near certain goal attempt. I''m pretty sure McNamee would have been wandering around on half way as Huddersfield broke forward.

[/quote]Where as I am pretty sure that McNamee would not have to run around like a headless chicken doing the donkey work that Lappin may do - because the opposition midfield and defence would always be sat that much deeper on his side of the pitch.Ever heard of the saying... The best form of defence is always attack???Where is the evidence to suggest that we would get cut apart with McNamee playing from the few games he has started for us?  We have looked far stronger down his side of the pitch when he has played than we have in other areas in my opinion.

[Jacko 0]

Just my opinion but that team against Huddersfield had the right balance about it on Saturday I thought. I thought once the team flattened out into a 4-4-2 when we didnt have the ball and became a diamond once we had it the system worked well. I would bring Drury in for Rose next Saturday but that would be my only change. I agree with Smudge that Lappin has been below par recently but I thought Huddersfield was his best game for a while. Good assist for Elliot''s third as well.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="Smudger"]For me your best 11 players make the best team... [;)]I didn''t say I would play 5 strikers and no defenders did I?For me a great goalkeeper in Forster, a pretty solid defence of 4, with Rusty sitting just in front of them and Korey snapping at peoples heals as well should be more than enough to cope with the attacking threat of nearly all of the teams in this rubbish league.I can''t really see any teams at the moment who I would be worried about putting a slightly more attacking line up out against by bringing in McNamee for Lappin.[/quote]

I take it your wink means you know this statement isn''t correct, but this is your main argument, I don''t understand Smudger[*-)]

[/quote]It doesn''t mean anything of the sort... 11 best players = the best team.It is obvious that you need a balance within the side, but as I have explained many times, for me a great goalkeepeer at this level, plus 4 experienced defenders at this level or higher, plus a defensive midfielder in Russell who is a class above anything at this level, plus young Korey snapping at peoples heels is more than enough defensive natured players for me to feel comfortable with facing any team at this level.Also I still do not buy in to the reasoning that many seem to have with regards to Lappin offering any more defensively than McNamee can offer.  McNamee picks up many loose balls with his pace, wins one or two tackles per game (which is all that Lappin usually does) and pushes the opposition midfield and defence on his side of the pitch to sit very deep and double up on him - so this does not allow them to sit in our half and take the game to us (as Huddersfield seemed to do 1st half on Saturday).

[morty 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Canary_on_the Trent"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="King Korey"]Am i not the only one who thought Lappin was lethargical with his play yesterday? Didn''t seem to put his foot in for the cause. One prime example was when the ball became loose towards his wing. He could of sprinted and got it, but was lazy and Huddersfield countered and could of easily scored.[/quote]Can''t really comment mate... it sounds from the radio commentary that Lappin had one of his better games in many months yesterday and he obviously set up our 3rd goal.However, with regards to him closing down players and winning tackles in games I have sen little evidence of this over the course of the games I have attended this season.  This is one of the main reasons (along with the quality of the opposition) that I am convinced we would not be losing out on much by dropping Lappin for McNamee and that we would not be left short defensively any more than we are already.For me those who point to McNamee''s shortfalls defensively have been unable to provide any evidence as to the number of tackles that Lappin wins per game and few have admitted that by playing McNamee it forces the opposition to sit very deep down his side of the pitch - which has a positive impact on our defensive capabilities as a team in itself. [/quote]

It''s not just tackles that show how much defensive work is done, the number of times Lappin gets back and doubles up with Rose/Drury or closes down a player in the midfield preventing a pass or shot is inbvaluable to the team. I could be mistaken but I think Lappin made a key challenge as a Huddersfield was running into our box at 1-1 or 2-1 yesterdy, don''t think he won the ball but it certainly prevented a near certain goal attempt. I''m pretty sure McNamee would have been wandering around on half way as Huddersfield broke forward.

[/quote]Where as I am pretty sure that McNamee would not have to run around like a headless chicken doing the donkey work that Lappin may do - because the opposition midfield and defence would always be sat that much deeper on his side of the pitch.Ever heard of the saying... The best form of defence is always attack???Where is the evidence to suggest that we would get cut apart with McNamee playing from the few games he has started for us?  We have looked far stronger down his side of the pitch when he has played than we have in other areas in my opinion.[/quote]I think that Lambert has been very careful in which games he starts McNamee, and I would not expect him to start against Leeds. Unless maybe Andy Hughes is at LB lol.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Good Touch For A Big Man"]Just my opinion but that team against Huddersfield had the right balance about it on Saturday I thought. I thought once the team flattened out into a 4-4-2 when we didnt have the ball and became a diamond once we had it the system worked well. I would bring Drury in for Rose next Saturday but that would be my only change. I agree with Smudge that Lappin has been below par recently but I thought Huddersfield was his best game for a while. Good assist for Elliot''s third as well.[/quote]I have admitted as much myself and fully expect to see him start at Swindon on Saturday.... [Y]For me he is still the weak link in our midfield though and will be the player that almost certainly sees himself demoted to the bench or further at the beginning of next season.

[ROBFLECK 132]

Definitely, let him play against his former club! He''ll do everything to impress against them!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="adycanary"]

[quote user="7rew"]I can only comment on the two matches I have seem recently: Oldham (A) and Huddersfield (A). My opinion is that we looked much more comfortable with 3 midfield players and 3 attackers rather than the 2/4 we had at Oldham. The criticism of Lappin''s play that I had is that when attacking he didn''t really hare after balls like a winger would. A couple of times he could have chased in to channels faster and we wouldn''t have lost possession. But then he wasn''t playing as a winger but as a wide midfielder - however he was getting the balls that should be given to a winger, the ones MacNamee thrived on. I didn''t really notice him missing or ducking tackles that were there to be made. That said he was much better defensively that Nacnamee and also better in the inside left channel than MacNamee. Personally I can''t say I think either player is better than the other. Both play the roles they are asked to (and suit them) rather well. I definitely don''t believe that the best 11 players are the ones you want on the pitch though. (Coughs *Lampard* *Gerrard* ) I would favour Lappin as more likely to yield results at Swindon and aagainst Leeds personally.[/quote]

Agree with you there, would like to point out also, that when rose done that awful pack pass yesterday, it was Lappin who got back to cover on the line, he may not be the quickest but he covers a hell or a lot of ground during a match, MacNamee would not have got back that far. Its a case of don''t mend it if its not broken but would bring Drury in for Rose as I think Drury and Lappin play better together.

[/quote]If it is a case of do not mend it if it''s not broken then remind me why McNamee was dropped yesterday after the positive results and good performances by him in recent weeks?If you were sticking to that theory then surely Russell would of been on the bench?Pick your best 11 when they are open to you I say.With the poor quality of the opposition we are up against I am not sure that Lambert has even discoved his best 11 yet.  Maybe it''s a squad game and he is picking and choosing?  You certainly can''t argue with the results, but it will not be so easy next season and for me we will find Lappin on the bench at best by September/October.

[7rew 0]

Smudger. Have you ever heard the saying:

Attacks win matches, Defences win leagues.

Again, only speaking from Oldham (A), MacNamee does not keep "his" fullback or midfield pressed back because he doesn''t have a fullback.

Against Oldham we didn''t play 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 or whatever. We played with a bank of 4 (Martin Doc Nelson Rose), 2 holding in the middle (Smith and Lappin) and then 4 attackers (MacNamee, Hoolahan, Martin and Holt) who roved wherever in front of the rest. We often had Hoolahan up front alone with the others behind him or Martin and Holt up front with Hoolahan and MacNamee left and right or right and left. Martin frequently ended up in a wing position with Hoolahan central behind Holt etc etc etc. It is the same way that Holt/Hoolahan/Martin play as a three.

This means we have the attack we do and it is why we are so successful - it is difficult to mark a front 3/4 who change positions at will.

Against Oldham we were certainly cut apart a few times. Fortunately Oldham are not very good. Had we played the same against Huddersfield, who can actually score goals, then we would have conceeded 2 or 3. Our goals were built on dominating the possession for most of the second half and taking the chances we made.

Personally I expect to see Lambert persist with 4-3-X for the next two matches against stronger attacks before maybe bringing MacNamee back in for the weaker teams after that.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="7rew"]Smudger. Have you ever heard the saying: Attacks win matches, Defences win leagues. Again, only speaking from Oldham (A), MacNamee does not keep "his" fullback or midfield pressed back because he doesn''t have a fullback. Against Oldham we didn''t play 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 or whatever. We played with a bank of 4 (Martin Doc Nelson Rose), 2 holding in the middle (Smith and Lappin) and then 4 attackers (MacNamee, Hoolahan, Martin and Holt) who roved wherever in front of the rest. We often had Hoolahan up front alone with the others behind him or Martin and Holt up front with Hoolahan and MacNamee left and right or right and left. Martin frequently ended up in a wing position with Hoolahan central behind Holt etc etc etc. It is the same way that Holt/Hoolahan/Martin play as a three. This means we have the attack we do and it is why we are so successful - it is difficult to mark a front 3/4 who change positions at will. Against Oldham we were certainly cut apart a few times. Fortunately Oldham are not very good. Had we played the same against Huddersfield, who can actually score goals, then we would have conceeded 2 or 3. Our goals were built on dominating the possession for most of the second half and taking the chances we made. Personally I expect to see Lambert persist with 4-3-X for the next two matches against stronger attacks before maybe bringing MacNamee back in for the weaker teams after that.[/quote]

 

That''s all fair comment, but against Yeovil McNamee played pretty much exclusively as a right winger and tackled back well. In fact Holt''s goal resulted from Macca winning a ball near the halfway line.

Lappin has benefitted from being a  left footed midfielder rather than a winger, but, in my view, flatters to deceive in that his tackle count isn''t particularly high, he often concedes needless free kicks and he shoots like a girl. That said, he apparently had one of his better games at Huddersfield , so will deservedly keep his place.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Webbo118"]

I never cease to be amazed by some (a lot) of the things that I read on here. We have just come through what was universally regarded as our most difficult remaining game of the season against a team unbeaten at home. We concede an early goal and show great resilience and character to come back and get the three points. What reaction does this produce?

1)  General comments that we are in a rubbish division, playing rubbish teams who we should defeat easily.                                   

2)  Criticism of the team selected by the Manager, e.g. "I would have played Mcnamee".

3) The apparent choice of Simon Lappin as current Club scapegoat. No doubt the usual sheep will soon be climbing on to this bandwagon.

Take nothing for granted and please do not easily forget. Remember where we were some 6 months ago. It looked far more likely then for us to be heading to Division 4 than the Championship. I consider that we are in an extremely fortunate position. Through luck, judgment, skill or a combination of all three, we have acquired an extremely talented Manager who has played the game at a high level and, unusually, appears also to be blessed with excellent managerial and motivational skills. I would much prefer to place my trust in him than to give voice to my own individual prejudices (we all have them) about certain players. The criticism evident on this Forum really serves no useful purpose at all. 

[/quote]If you thought Huddersfield was going to be difficult I really do start to worry.... they were always there for the taking as they are quite simply dreadful at the back!As for Simon Lappin, come back and tell me what a great player he is in October.He simply is not good enough for the Championship and McNamee is a far superior player FULL STOP.We have had a great season since Lambert took the reigns as I predicted when many were uncertain of the man.  We are almost certianly going to be playing at a higher level next season though and each and every club should look for continuous improvement.  The criticism of Lappin is not personal and has been pretty fair (I said it sounded like he had a good game yesterday), it is simply based around looking to improve the team and getting a superior player who will play a big part at a higher level more involved.For me if we play the diamond next season then we need a better quality left footed midfielder who can tackle and create a little.  I would also love to see another winger purchased during the close season.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

[quote user="7rew"]Smudger. Have you ever heard the saying: Attacks win matches, Defences win leagues. Again, only speaking from Oldham (A), MacNamee does not keep "his" fullback or midfield pressed back because he doesn''t have a fullback. Against Oldham we didn''t play 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 or whatever. We played with a bank of 4 (Martin Doc Nelson Rose), 2 holding in the middle (Smith and Lappin) and then 4 attackers (MacNamee, Hoolahan, Martin and Holt) who roved wherever in front of the rest. We often had Hoolahan up front alone with the others behind him or Martin and Holt up front with Hoolahan and MacNamee left and right or right and left. Martin frequently ended up in a wing position with Hoolahan central behind Holt etc etc etc. It is the same way that Holt/Hoolahan/Martin play as a three. This means we have the attack we do and it is why we are so successful - it is difficult to mark a front 3/4 who change positions at will. Against Oldham we were certainly cut apart a few times. Fortunately Oldham are not very good. Had we played the same against Huddersfield, who can actually score goals, then we would have conceeded 2 or 3. Our goals were built on dominating the possession for most of the second half and taking the chances we made. Personally I expect to see Lambert persist with 4-3-X for the next two matches against stronger attacks before maybe bringing MacNamee back in for the weaker teams after that.[/quote]

 

That''s all fair comment, but against Yeovil McNamee played pretty much exclusively as a right winger and tackled back well. In fact Holt''s goal resulted from Macca winning a ball near the halfway line.

Lappin has benefitted from being a  left footed midfielder rather than a winger, but, in my view, flatters to deceive in that his tackle count isn''t particularly high, he often concedes needless free kicks and he shoots like a girl. That said, he apparently had one of his better games at Huddersfield , so will deservedly keep his place.

[/quote]Shoots like a girl... lol [Y]But he did score a wonder goal about 3 years ago from a free kick in a relegation clash at Luton.  What more do you expect? [:S]

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="7rew"]Smudger. Have you ever heard the saying:

Attacks win matches, Defences win leagues.

Again, only speaking from Oldham (A), MacNamee does not keep "his" fullback or midfield pressed back because he doesn''t have a fullback.

Against Oldham we didn''t play 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 or whatever. We played with a bank of 4 (Martin Doc Nelson Rose), 2 holding in the middle (Smith and Lappin) and then 4 attackers (MacNamee, Hoolahan, Martin and Holt) who roved wherever in front of the rest. We often had Hoolahan up front alone with the others behind him or Martin and Holt up front with Hoolahan and MacNamee left and right or right and left. Martin frequently ended up in a wing position with Hoolahan central behind Holt etc etc etc. It is the same way that Holt/Hoolahan/Martin play as a three.

This means we have the attack we do and it is why we are so successful - it is difficult to mark a front 3/4 who change positions at will.

Against Oldham we were certainly cut apart a few times. Fortunately Oldham are not very good. Had we played the same against Huddersfield, who can actually score goals, then we would have conceeded 2 or 3. Our goals were built on dominating the possession for most of the second half and taking the chances we made.

Personally I expect to see Lambert persist with 4-3-X for the next two matches against stronger attacks before maybe bringing MacNamee back in for the weaker teams after that.[/quote]Again at Oldham it was McNamee''s quality service in to the box that won us the match... [:P]Where as Huddersfield are p.iss poor at the back???

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

Lappin ......... That said, he apparently had one of his better games at Huddersfield , so will deservedly keep his place.

[/quote]

If that is rated as one of his better games.................

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Webbo118"]

I never cease to be amazed by some (a lot) of the things that I read on here. We have just come through what was universally regarded as our most difficult remaining game of the season against a team unbeaten at home. We concede an early goal and show great resilience and character to come back and get the three points. What reaction does this produce?

1)  General comments that we are in a rubbish division, playing rubbish teams who we should defeat easily.                                   

2)  Criticism of the team selected by the Manager, e.g. "I would have played Mcnamee".

3) The apparent choice of Simon Lappin as current Club scapegoat. No doubt the usual sheep will soon be climbing on to this bandwagon.

Take nothing for granted and please do not easily forget. Remember where we were some 6 months ago. It looked far more likely then for us to be heading to Division 4 than the Championship. I consider that we are in an extremely fortunate position. Through luck, judgment, skill or a combination of all three, we have acquired an extremely talented Manager who has played the game at a high level and, unusually, appears also to be blessed with excellent managerial and motivational skills. I would much prefer to place my trust in him than to give voice to my own individual prejudices (we all have them) about certain players. The criticism evident on this Forum really serves no useful purpose at all. 

[/quote]

If you thought Huddersfield was going to be difficult I really do start to worry.... they were always there for the taking as they are quite simply dreadful at the back!

As for Simon Lappin, come back and tell me what a great player he is in October.

He simply is not good enough for the Championship and McNamee is a far superior player FULL STOP.

We have had a great season since Lambert took the reigns as I predicted when many were uncertain of the man.  We are almost certianly going to be playing at a higher level next season though and each and every club should look for continuous improvement.  The criticism of Lappin is not personal and has been pretty fair (I said it sounded like he had a good game yesterday), it is simply based around looking to improve the team and getting a superior player who will play a big part at a higher level more involved.

For me if we play the diamond next season then we need a better quality left footed midfielder who can tackle and create a little.  I would also love to see another winger purchased during the close season.
[/quote]

That really doesn''t worry me at all.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="Beauseant"]

Lappin ......... That said, he apparently had one of his better games at Huddersfield , so will deservedly keep his place.

[/quote]

If that is rated as one of his better games.................

[/quote]hehe well said Tangy... say no more, say no more! [;)]

[Lurd 0]

If Lambert rates Lappin above Mcnamee and all our other midfielders who are currently not playing, then that is good enough for me.

[bjg123 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Canary_on_the Trent"]

1 striker and pack the midfield?

Looks like 2 up top with Kaka just behind and just Diarra holding to me with 2 attack minded midfielders in a 3.

[/quote]You obviously view things differntly to me then.I would not describe either Ronaldo or Kaka as Strikers and I would also describe Guti and Granero as pretty defensive minded midfielders too.  I may be wrong but do either of those two get many assists?[/quote]Wow, this is so very wrong, Guti is the least defensively minded midfielder you''ll ever see, literally offers no defensive qualities at all, doesn''t even track back. Granero is an attacking midfielder as well.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Larry David"]If Lambert rates Lappin above Mcnamee and all our other midfielders who are currently not playing, then that is good enough for me.
[/quote]

And me. I am reasonably confident that he knows a little more about it than me; and a little less about it than Smudger - NOT !!

[king canary 7,562]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="king canary"]Granero and Guti are not defensive players. For me that is a 4-2-3-1 with three attacking midfielders in Kaka Ronald and Granero. They dont play Benzema as he has been gash and Van de Vaart is not a first team regular. As for the Norwich related points I was not surprised to see McNamee out but I was surprised we went for the diamond and we seemed to struggle to contain the wingers. Personally I dont think having McNamee and Hoolahan would give enough cover to the full backs as despite whart we say about the quality of this league, Huddersfield have some handy wide players and we were playing a very average left back. Also we should sign Gary Roberts.[/quote]Rotherham''s Gary Roberts?[/quote]No Huddersfields- can play either flank and can cross a ball very well. Ignore the 2 years at the scum and he would be a great little signing.

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Canary_on_the Trent"]

[quote user="Smudger"]Being one of Lappin''s biggest critics, to me it sounded like he had his best game in months yesterday to be fair to him.

I do believe that McNamee is a better player though, whether that be in a 4-4-2 the diamond or another formation.  I would always those who I considered to be my best players to be on the pitch if they were fit.

Lambert was given all the plaudits for playing Hoolahan in his best position, at this level I see no reason why he is not able to do the same with McNamee.

I would like to see McNamee in next weeks team also, but do not expect to see it for one minute.  If Lambert does surprise us by playing McNamee next week then I think Hoolahan or Korey''s places will be most at risk again.  Not something I agree with but there you go.
[/quote]

Rather than our best team?

[/quote]

For me your best 11 players make the best team... [;)]

[/quote]

Anyone else hear the "QI" alarm bell rining with that quote!?! How many examples down the years are there that prove this to be wrong!?!?

Madrid (failing to qualify beyond quarters of Champs league for 6 years running despite all the galacticos and record breaking transfers), Liverpool currently.... and all the prem teams where supposedly inferior players make better teams, witness Reading and Wigan in their early prem years, Charlton too...

[grantroederdisaster 0]

[quote user="Doc''s Big Nose at the Heart of the Defence"]

I felt it was abit harsh for Lambert to drop him yesterday and not even bring him on when we had so much space on the right and I think he should start at Swindon. Players always perform against their old clubs and Lappin was just not up to it yesterday.

Thoughts?

You obviously wern''t at Huddersfield if you think Lappin wasn''t up to it in the game!

Lappin was solid and was part of the glorious passing football that lead to our 3rd goal!

I can''t stand blinkered, way of the mark critiscism of players!

Lappin seems to have got some of the unfair bull that the Doc normally has to endure!

For the reocrd our weak links at Huddersfield were Martin was poor up front, The Doc and Russell Martin struggled in the 1st half but turned it around and Roses scatterbrain play means we''d be better of with Drury although His attacking wasn''t bad at times!

Yes after some satisfactory performances Mcnamee was unlucky to miss out but Lambert knows what hes doing and the change worked well. Swindon like Huddersfield are one of the Divisions better sides so I''d go with an unchanged line up unless Drury is ready!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="grantroederdisaster"][quote user="Doc''s Big Nose at the Heart of the Defence"]

I felt it was abit harsh for Lambert to drop him yesterday and not even bring him on when we had so much space on the right and I think he should start at Swindon. Players always perform against their old clubs and Lappin was just not up to it yesterday.

Thoughts?

You obviously wern''t at Huddersfield if you think Lappin wasn''t up to it in the game!

Lappin was solid and was part of the glorious passing football that lead to our 3rd goal!

I can''t stand blinkered, way of the mark critiscism of players!

Lappin seems to have got some of the unfair bull that the Doc normally has to endure!

For the reocrd our weak links at Huddersfield were Martin was poor up front, The Doc and Russell Martin struggled in the 1st half but turned it around and Roses scatterbrain play means we''d be better of with Drury although His attacking wasn''t bad at times!

Yes after some satisfactory performances Mcnamee was unlucky to miss out but Lambert knows what hes doing and the change worked well. Swindon like Huddersfield are one of the Divisions better sides so I''d go with an unchanged line up unless Drury is ready![/quote]

Did Rose''s scatterbrain play not lead to one of our goals on Saturday?

I know he nearly evened it up with his error at the other end - but how about a bit of credit where it''s due?  I am sure you can manage it if you try?  I even gave Lappin a little bit of praise this week... [;)]

[Canary_on_the Trent 0]

[quote user="7rew"]Our goals were built on dominating the possession for most of the second half and taking the chances we made. Personally I expect to see Lambert persist with 4-3-X for the next two matches against stronger attacks before maybe bringing MacNamee back in for the weaker teams after that.[/quote]

A point I was trying to make, by having 3 midfielders opposed to just 2 in the middle not only can we win the ball back far more quickly but it enables us to dominate possession and with the front 3 we possess we will create chances with all this possession. Seems a strange thing to say but by having less attacking players on the pitch we create more chances because we''re able to have more of the ball.