Anthony McNamee can't defend...

[The gut 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]

Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?

We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch!
[/quote]

Without getting involved in whether I think he should be in the team or not, I just had to point out that this is a dreadful use of statistics. Come on smudger!

[can u sit down please 0]

Link I''m with you. The defence dictates how high you play up the pitch.

If forwards are isolated it''s because the midfield ain''t pushing on.

Who can push the midfield on?.......

[The gut 0]

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

Who did we play with McNamee in the side? Southend, Oldham & Yeovil

It''s not just the lack of protection he offers Rose/Martin but we''re a better unit with the ball with the 3 in the middle, it allows us to win the ball back quickly, we would just allow the opposition so much time on the ball with McNamee & Hoolahan, we got away with it against the above mentioned sides but decent sides like Huddersfield & Swindon would have created lots, having 3 in the middle also allows us to keep possession, without the ball we won''t hurt times half as much as we can with the ball.

[/quote]

Do you have any stats to back this up?

How many have we conceeded with the diamond in recent matches?

PS - we have also won every game that McNamee has started.  He also had a large hand in rescuing all 3 points at Walsall away.
[/quote]

Statto smudger, here''s one for ya........ Forster has been in goal for nearly all our goals conceded this season, and only slightly more silly than your stats. 

[Lambert is King 0]

[quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]

Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?

We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch!
[/quote]

Without getting involved in whether I think he should be in the team or not, I just had to point out that this is a dreadful use of statistics. Come on smudger!

[/quote]

 

Why not quote the goals Swindon conceded when he was on the pitch.  But then again he was not on the pitch that long because he kept getting substituted early in the second half. Swindon also then used him as an impact player, and then I am not sure towards the end was he dropped or injured?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="can u sit down please"]Link I''m with you. The defence dictates how high you play up the pitch.

If forwards are isolated it''s because the midfield ain''t pushing on.

Who can push the midfield on?.......[/quote]If the midfield needs to be told to push up the pitch by the defence continually, then that would suggest to me that the midfield you are playing as a unit is not a very good one.Each of the 3 areas of the pitch works as a unit and to me each of these areas dictate how high up the pitch they play.The defense works as a unit ensuring they hold a high enough line and the midfield should do the same.  The defenders have enough to worry about with ensuring that the line they hold is the correct one without getting overly concerned with doing other team mates jobs.  When defenders get involved with pushing the midfield further up the pitch is usually when a opposing striker grasps an opportunity to break the offside trap.Well that''s the way I see it anyhow.

[Smudger 0]

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

Who did we play with McNamee in the side? Southend, Oldham & Yeovil

It''s not just the lack of protection he offers Rose/Martin but we''re a better unit with the ball with the 3 in the middle, it allows us to win the ball back quickly, we would just allow the opposition so much time on the ball with McNamee & Hoolahan, we got away with it against the above mentioned sides but decent sides like Huddersfield & Swindon would have created lots, having 3 in the middle also allows us to keep possession, without the ball we won''t hurt times half as much as we can with the ball.

[/quote]Do you have any stats to back this up?How many have we conceeded with the diamond in recent matches?PS - we have also won every game that McNamee has started.  He also had a large hand in rescuing all 3 points at Walsall away.[/quote]

Statto smudger, here''s one for ya........ Forster has been in goal for nearly all our goals conceded this season, and only slightly more silly than your stats. 

[/quote]Not really, what is Forsters goal per game ratio???You have to pick dumb holes like that when you have no counter arguement though don''t you?How about expressing your opinions?  Don''t hide behind the rubbish you gave above about not wanting to debate the issue at hand.We have conceeded more on a per game basis over the last few games when McNamee has not been in the team as opposed to when he has - True or False???

[Yellow Rages 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]

Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?

We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch!
[/quote]

Would McNamee have prevented Swindon''s goal on Saturday? No (the Doc slipped on the wet pitch and lost his player, who nodded it in). Huddersfield''s goal the week before came from another defensive lapse at a corner (Nelson lost his player on that occasion). 

I know you don''t want Lappin in the team, but your argument just doesn''t hold water.   

[/quote]

...or the two goals against Southampton at home, or the two conceeded away at Millwall, or the one against Brighton away, or the one against Hartlepool at home?

Shall we continue?

We sit far too deep as a team without McNamee in the line up for me - Russell plus the back four and a fantastic keeper at this level in Fraser Forster is more than enough to cope with what teams in this division can throw at us in my opinion.

Why did Swindon have so much of the play on Saturday, which led to the pressure they built up which finally resulted in their well deserved equaliser? 

Because we sat FAR TOO DEEP as a team!
[/quote]

Why did we go one nil up without him? Or Hucks? Or big Dave Strihavka? Well the truth is there are too many variables in football to account for one individual, for or against a score line. You can pick the bones all you like but the fact is you cannot prove your point any more than anyone else can disprove it. I think it is more about the formation we play with him in the side rather than the man himself.

[lappinitup 629]

I''m with you on this one smudger, I think we should play McNamee at centre back Saturday! [Y]

[Lambert is King 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="can u sit down please"]Link I''m with you. The defence dictates how high you play up the pitch. If forwards are isolated it''s because the midfield ain''t pushing on. Who can push the midfield on?.......[/quote]

If the midfield needs to be told to push up the pitch by the defence continually, then that would suggest to me that the midfield you are playing as a unit is not a very good one.

Each of the 3 areas of the pitch works as a unit and to me each of these areas dictate how high up the pitch they play.

The defense works as a unit ensuring they hold a high enough line and the midfield should do the same.  The defenders have enough to worry about with ensuring that the line they hold is the correct one without getting overly concerned with doing other team mates jobs.  When defenders get involved with pushing the midfield further up the pitch is usually when a opposing striker grasps an opportunity to break the offside trap.

Well that''s the way I see it anyhow.
[/quote]

 

Hi Smudge

 

My opinion is similar however imo what you say applies to a 442. In the diamond system your full backs become your most important attacking option, and when defending should only have to defend crosses and times when the left / right midfielder goes past Smith or Lappin. Teams who have 2 good enough wingers to outplay the diamond are few and far between, recent examples are Southampton and Huddersfield. In the diamond if a player receives the ball out wide you will see Smith or Lappin making the challenge and the full backs covering the space behind.

Personally as I have mentioned before I beleive we will see far more of McNamee assuming Lambert moves to a 442 next season. Again however imo this will involve signing a right winger and a ball playing midfielder. I do also think that if this is the plan Hoolahan will be used to fund this as I cant see him fitting into this system.

  

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"]I''m with you on this one smudger, I think we should play McNamee at centre back Saturday! [Y][/quote]haha I like it Lapps.... at least we would have a bit of pace there for once! [:P]

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch![/quote]

Would McNamee have prevented Swindon''s goal on Saturday? No (the Doc slipped on the wet pitch and lost his player, who nodded it in). Huddersfield''s goal the week before came from another defensive lapse at a corner (Nelson lost his player on that occasion). 

I know you don''t want Lappin in the team, but your argument just doesn''t hold water.   

[/quote]...or the two goals against Southampton at home, or the two conceeded away at Millwall, or the one against Brighton away, or the one against Hartlepool at home?Shall we continue?We sit far too deep as a team without McNamee in the line up for me - Russell plus the back four and a fantastic keeper at this level in Fraser Forster is more than enough to cope with what teams in this division can throw at us in my opinion.Why did Swindon have so much of the play on Saturday, which led to the pressure they built up which finally resulted in their well deserved equaliser?  Because we sat FAR TOO DEEP as a team![/quote]

Why did we go one nil up without him? Or Hucks? Or big Dave Strihavka? Well the truth is there are too many variables in football to account for one individual, for or against a score line. You can pick the bones all you like but the fact is you cannot prove your point any more than anyone else can disprove it. I think it is more about the formation we play with him in the side rather than the man himself.

[/quote]We went 1-0 up because Rose got forwards very well and put in an excellent cross from the left hand side.I will agree with you that it is impossible to prove anything until McNamee is given a chance in his preferred position down the left hand side.  Do you not think that he has deserved that chance yet?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Lambert is King"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="can u sit down please"]Link I''m with you. The defence dictates how high you play up the pitch. If forwards are isolated it''s because the midfield ain''t pushing on. Who can push the midfield on?.......[/quote]If the midfield needs to be told to push up the pitch by the defence continually, then that would suggest to me that the midfield you are playing as a unit is not a very good one.Each of the 3 areas of the pitch works as a unit and to me each of these areas dictate how high up the pitch they play.The defense works as a unit ensuring they hold a high enough line and the midfield should do the same.  The defenders have enough to worry about with ensuring that the line they hold is the correct one without getting overly concerned with doing other team mates jobs.  When defenders get involved with pushing the midfield further up the pitch is usually when a opposing striker grasps an opportunity to break the offside trap.Well that''s the way I see it anyhow.[/quote]

 

Hi Smudge

 

My opinion is similar however imo what you say applies to a 442. In the diamond system your full backs become your most important attacking option, and when defending should only have to defend crosses and times when the left / right midfielder goes past Smith or Lappin. Teams who have 2 good enough wingers to outplay the diamond are few and far between, recent examples are Southampton and Huddersfield. In the diamond if a player receives the ball out wide you will see Smith or Lappin making the challenge and the full backs covering the space behind.

Personally as I have mentioned before I beleive we will see far more of McNamee assuming Lambert moves to a 442 next season. Again however imo this will involve signing a right winger and a ball playing midfielder. I do also think that if this is the plan Hoolahan will be used to fund this as I cant see him fitting into this system.

  

[/quote]I like both systems and hope that we don''t sell Hoolahan next season - although I guess that Hughes could fit in here if required.I think McNamee can play left point of the diamond this season as the standard of the opposition is not very good (exactly the same reason why we get away with playing Lappin there).  Both players would be likely to get murdered in that system against most of the teams at ahigher level in my opinion.  If we are to consider playing the diamond at all next season then I would say that we need to sign a left footed centre/left side midfielder who can tackle better than both Lappin and McNamee and who can create quite a bit also.  Not forgetting that the amount of assists can''t be compared to Lappins this season as we would be playing at a higher level.  I would however hope that our new signing would be able to create a similar number of chances as Lappin has done this season, but am pretty sure that Lappin would create very little and get cut to ribbons by most teams if he was first choice in his current role at a higher level next season.

[ZLF 274]

No only a few games at a similar level and not the most gifted of players either.  Simply a very hard grafter who worked his heart out foir the team, done the simple things well and made those who played alongside him feel confident that I would be grafting and winning the ball and not giving it away cheaply either.

Sounds a bit likeLappin [;)]

I find it inconceivable that Lambert would play anyone this season ahead of a player who he thought would do a better job in the champs next year.  His best players are his proven starting 11.   

[LinkNR9 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"]

[quote user="Good Touch For A Big Man"]I would''nt start with McNamee at the moment. However I think Smudge makes a valid point about him possibly pushing us higher up the field. Hughes was totally ineffective when he came on and we seemed to drop even deeper. Felt he could have come on as sub.[/quote]

It''s nothing to do with one midfielder. As you probably know, it''s the back four that dictates how deep the team plays. (When a team defends a narrow lead, there''s sometimes a tendancy to drop off so that the ball isn''t played in behind a nervy back four, so that they have to turn to defend; this is especially so if your back four isn''t blessed with pace). You might have seen Lambert doing his nut on a couple of occasions this season when this has happened.

In turn, this pulls the midfield back and then the front players back, so that the opposition doesn''t exploit the spaces.  

[/quote]

I think that you are wrong here.  It is mainly the midfield who dictate how far up the pitch the rest of the team sits.

Too deep an you invite pressure on to the midfield and the back four.

We were not winning anywhere near enough ball in the centre of the pitch yesterday.  Was this our midfields fault or were the defence to blame?

We had Russell, Smith and Lappin rarely going out of their own half before half time - which obviously invites teams to launch attack after attack at you.  We were lucky that it was only Swindon Town and not a team that could of taken advantage of how far back we sat.
[/quote]

We''ll have to agree to disagree here. However, having played semi-pro football, I''m confident with my post. I''m presuming that you''ve played at a higher level, Smudger? 

[/quote]

No only a few games at a similar level and not the most gifted of players either.  Simply a very hard grafter who worked his heart out foir the team, done the simple things well and made those who played alongside him feel confident that I would be grafting and winning the ball and not giving it away cheaply either.
[/quote]

All teams need one of those, Smudger (like Russell for this season).

[can u sit down please 0]

The defensive line you play, whether high up or deep dicates how far up the pitch you are as a team. Simples [;)]

[Canary_on_the Trent 0]

I don''t have a problem playing 4-4-2 but it isn''t a 4-4-2 with Hoolahan & McNamee in it, Villa play a 4-4-2 with out & out wingers but they defend and aren''t out-muscled with ease like Hoolahan & McNamee.

Who is our most cretive player? Hoolahan

How do we get the best out of him? give him a free role

Can we do that with McNamee in the side? No.

We''re solid with the 3; Smith, Russell & Lappin, allowing Hoolahan to create further up the field, if we were to go to a 2 with McNamee coming in, we''d so be so unbalanced, Hoolahan wouldn''t have so much freedom, we wouldn''t win the ball back so frequently and we wouldn''t be able to keep possession in the midfield area.

 

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

No only a few games at a similar level and not the most gifted of players either.  Simply a very hard grafter who worked his heart out foir the team, done the simple things well and made those who played alongside him feel confident that I would be grafting and winning the ball and not giving it away cheaply either.Sounds a bit likeLappin [;)]

I find it inconceivable that Lambert would play anyone this season ahead of a player who he thought would do a better job in the champs next year.  His best players are his proven starting 11.   

[/quote]Sounds nothing like Lappin at all to me... even in one of my worst matches I would win more tackles than Lappin won in a season.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Canary_on_the Trent"]

I don''t have a problem playing 4-4-2 but it isn''t a 4-4-2 with Hoolahan & McNamee in it, Villa play a 4-4-2 with out & out wingers but they defend and aren''t out-muscled with ease like Hoolahan & McNamee.

Who is our most cretive player? Hoolahan

How do we get the best out of him? give him a free role

Can we do that with McNamee in the side? No.

We''re solid with the 3; Smith, Russell & Lappin, allowing Hoolahan to create further up the field, if we were to go to a 2 with McNamee coming in, we''d so be so unbalanced, Hoolahan wouldn''t have so much freedom, we wouldn''t win the ball back so frequently and we wouldn''t be able to keep possession in the midfield area.

 

[/quote]You mean like we could not do against Swindon on Saturday???

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Smudger"]even in one of my worst matches I would win more tackles than Lappin won in a season.[/quote]Who have you actually played for smudger?

[Yellow Rages 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]

Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?

We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch!
[/quote]

Would McNamee have prevented Swindon''s goal on Saturday? No (the Doc slipped on the wet pitch and lost his player, who nodded it in). Huddersfield''s goal the week before came from another defensive lapse at a corner (Nelson lost his player on that occasion). 

I know you don''t want Lappin in the team, but your argument just doesn''t hold water.   

[/quote]

...or the two goals against Southampton at home, or the two conceeded away at Millwall, or the one against Brighton away, or the one against Hartlepool at home?

Shall we continue?

We sit far too deep as a team without McNamee in the line up for me - Russell plus the back four and a fantastic keeper at this level in Fraser Forster is more than enough to cope with what teams in this division can throw at us in my opinion.

Why did Swindon have so much of the play on Saturday, which led to the pressure they built up which finally resulted in their well deserved equaliser? 

Because we sat FAR TOO DEEP as a team!
[/quote]

Why did we go one nil up without him? Or Hucks? Or big Dave Strihavka? Well the truth is there are too many variables in football to account for one individual, for or against a score line. You can pick the bones all you like but the fact is you cannot prove your point any more than anyone else can disprove it. I think it is more about the formation we play with him in the side rather than the man himself.

[/quote]

We went 1-0 up because Rose got forwards very well and put in an excellent cross from the left hand side.

I will agree with you that it is impossible to prove anything until McNamee is given a chance in his preferred position down the left hand side.  Do you not think that he has deserved that chance yet?
[/quote]

I think he probably has deserved his chance but at what cost? Does that mean you drop Wes and play the standard 4-4-2? If so then you also loose the effectiveness of Rose who seems to suit the diamond far more than the 4-4-2

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Smudger"]even in one of my worst matches I would win more tackles than Lappin won in a season.[/quote]Who have you actually played for smudger?[/quote]Jossy''s Giants here I am!Haven''t we been through this a few times before Lapps?  You really must keep up!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch![/quote]

Would McNamee have prevented Swindon''s goal on Saturday? No (the Doc slipped on the wet pitch and lost his player, who nodded it in). Huddersfield''s goal the week before came from another defensive lapse at a corner (Nelson lost his player on that occasion). 

I know you don''t want Lappin in the team, but your argument just doesn''t hold water.   

[/quote]...or the two goals against Southampton at home, or the two conceeded away at Millwall, or the one against Brighton away, or the one against Hartlepool at home?Shall we continue?We sit far too deep as a team without McNamee in the line up for me - Russell plus the back four and a fantastic keeper at this level in Fraser Forster is more than enough to cope with what teams in this division can throw at us in my opinion.Why did Swindon have so much of the play on Saturday, which led to the pressure they built up which finally resulted in their well deserved equaliser?  Because we sat FAR TOO DEEP as a team![/quote]

Why did we go one nil up without him? Or Hucks? Or big Dave Strihavka? Well the truth is there are too many variables in football to account for one individual, for or against a score line. You can pick the bones all you like but the fact is you cannot prove your point any more than anyone else can disprove it. I think it is more about the formation we play with him in the side rather than the man himself.

[/quote]We went 1-0 up because Rose got forwards very well and put in an excellent cross from the left hand side.I will agree with you that it is impossible to prove anything until McNamee is given a chance in his preferred position down the left hand side.  Do you not think that he has deserved that chance yet?[/quote]

I think he probably has deserved his chance but at what cost? Does that mean you drop Wes and play the standard 4-4-2? If so then you also loose the effectiveness of Rose who seems to suit the diamond far more than the 4-4-2

[/quote]For me McNamee on the left point of the diamond.  I have said for a while that I think we could get away with doing that against the majority of the teams in this division.Either that or 3-5-2 I think would be our best options.

[vos 155]

Somebody asked who Smudger played for. I believe I saw him at his peak. He was playing for Postwick Reserves.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="vos"]Somebody asked who Smudger played for. I believe I saw him at his peak. He was playing for Postwick Reserves.[/quote]Postwick Reserves - who are they?????Exactly!

[Lurd 0]

MS 4 AM 4EVA [:$]

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="LinkNR9"]

[quote user="Smudger"]...and we are losing out so much as a team defensively by playing such a lazy individual on the wing... [:$]

Is it not about time that this myth was buried once and for all?

We have only conceded one goal so far (at home to Southend) with McNamee on the pitch!
[/quote]

Would McNamee have prevented Swindon''s goal on Saturday? No (the Doc slipped on the wet pitch and lost his player, who nodded it in). Huddersfield''s goal the week before came from another defensive lapse at a corner (Nelson lost his player on that occasion). 

I know you don''t want Lappin in the team, but your argument just doesn''t hold water.   

[/quote]

...or the two goals against Southampton at home, or the two conceeded away at Millwall, or the one against Brighton away, or the one against Hartlepool at home?

Shall we continue?

We sit far too deep as a team without McNamee in the line up for me - Russell plus the back four and a fantastic keeper at this level in Fraser Forster is more than enough to cope with what teams in this division can throw at us in my opinion.

Why did Swindon have so much of the play on Saturday, which led to the pressure they built up which finally resulted in their well deserved equaliser? 

Because we sat FAR TOO DEEP as a team!
[/quote]

Why did we go one nil up without him? Or Hucks? Or big Dave Strihavka? Well the truth is there are too many variables in football to account for one individual, for or against a score line. You can pick the bones all you like but the fact is you cannot prove your point any more than anyone else can disprove it. I think it is more about the formation we play with him in the side rather than the man himself.

[/quote]

We went 1-0 up because Rose got forwards very well and put in an excellent cross from the left hand side.

I will agree with you that it is impossible to prove anything until McNamee is given a chance in his preferred position down the left hand side.  Do you not think that he has deserved that chance yet?
[/quote]

I think he probably has deserved his chance but at what cost? Does that mean you drop Wes and play the standard 4-4-2? If so then you also loose the effectiveness of Rose who seems to suit the diamond far more than the 4-4-2

[/quote]

For me McNamee on the left point of the diamond.  I have said for a while that I think we could get away with doing that against the majority of the teams in this division.

Either that or 3-5-2 I think would be our best options.
[/quote]

I''ll have a word with PL and try to persuade him to co-opt you on to the coaching team. I''m sure we would do far better with someone of your vast knowledge and experience on board. They have certainly missed a trick by not getting you involved already.

[7rew 0]

Smudger said: "For me McNamee on the left point of the diamond. I have said for a while that I think we could get away with doing that against the majority of the teams in this division."

This may well be true. However even if it is true, then matches like Huddersfield (7th, then unbeaten at home) Away, Swindon (4th) Away and probably Leeds (2nd) Home sound exactly the kind of matches where you couldn''t get away with it!

[ca 1]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]I''ve said it before and I will say it again I like McNamee[/quote]

I do too, he''s been unlucky not to get more games.

[The gut 0]

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

Who did we play with McNamee in the side? Southend, Oldham & Yeovil

It''s not just the lack of protection he offers Rose/Martin but we''re a better unit with the ball with the 3 in the middle, it allows us to win the ball back quickly, we would just allow the opposition so much time on the ball with McNamee & Hoolahan, we got away with it against the above mentioned sides but decent sides like Huddersfield & Swindon would have created lots, having 3 in the middle also allows us to keep possession, without the ball we won''t hurt times half as much as we can with the ball.

[/quote]

Do you have any stats to back this up?

How many have we conceeded with the diamond in recent matches?

PS - we have also won every game that McNamee has started.  He also had a large hand in rescuing all 3 points at Walsall away.
[/quote]

Statto smudger, here''s one for ya........ Forster has been in goal for nearly all our goals conceded this season, and only slightly more silly than your stats. 

[/quote]

Not really, what is Forsters goal per game ratio???

You have to pick dumb holes like that when you have no counter arguement though don''t you?

How about expressing your opinions?  Don''t hide behind the rubbish you gave above about not wanting to debate the issue at hand.

We have conceeded more on a per game basis over the last few games when McNamee has not been in the team as opposed to when he has - True or False???
[/quote]

Same as Mcnamees!!!!!!

I have no reason to find a counter argument, I was not picking dumb holes, merely demonstrating that you can find stats that pretty much say anything and prove nothing. I think you''re stats are quite meaningless at the moment and cannot be used as a conclusive argument to play Mcnamee.

I have already expressed my opinions about Lappin and McNamee before on other threads, I''m not hiding, I think you''ll see I''m willing to debate if I feel strongly enough. And there lies the reason why I didn''t want to get involved on that occasion, I don''t have a strong opinion on it. I have concerns about both of them and am quite happy to sit back and see who Lambert plays, and my guess is that it will be Lappin if it''s the diamond.

My answer to your true or false question can be whatever makes you happy because I think stats of  "over the last few games" is a little irrelevent!!!!

It''s a bit similar to a previous debate we''ve had smudger, don''t assume I disagree with you or don''t accept your point of view just because I think your reasoning is wrong. 

Now, what is the issue in hand now for me, a smoke, a drink and something to eat.

 

 

 

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="7rew"]Smudger said: "For me McNamee on the left point of the diamond. I have said for a while that I think we could get away with doing that against the majority of the teams in this division."

This may well be true. However even if it is true, then matches like Huddersfield (7th, then unbeaten at home) Away, Swindon (4th) Away and probably Leeds (2nd) Home sound exactly the kind of matches where you couldn''t get away with it![/quote]Test him against the best I say.  You would make an ideal England coach... bring some talent in for meaningless friendlies and then back to the same old sorry plop we have seen time and again before.Our midfield currenlty contains somebody who will not be able to perform to the required standard at a higher level and I will remind you all of this thread in September/October.  Huddersfield we were always going to get 3 points from if we played well.  They make the Dog and Duck look good at defending!Swindon - our main shortfall was that we sat so deep for over 70% of the match.  Without McNamee the only outlet we have is Holt''s strength and the ball usually comes straight back at us far too easily.People have said about not changing a winning team, but this did not seem to matter when Russell came back in for McNamee.  I guess that Lambert must feel that he started with his strongest midfield on Saturday, but this is something that I disagree with.