West Ham line up

[Dubai Mark 0]

I really cant see us playing with two strikers against West Ham, and if we did, and if fit, then I would actually go with RVW and Elmander. I know many will not agree with Elmander, but looking at what little we did well vs Man City (hard to find it I know), when you compare with how he handled things compared to Hooper then he would start in my front two right now. BUT, no way would I play with two front men anyway having seen West Ham a few times this season, as if we leave ourselves light in midfield we would be asking for trouble, particularly if they do play with a big man up front.

[ZLF 274]

[quote user="Eadie4England"]Elmander should not be starting, no way ![/quote]

 

I agree he should not be starting but he has offered more threat and play than hooper,  so if its a choice between those two elmander would also be my choice.

 

Just hoping RvW will be back.

[KeelansGlove 0]

Well Zip better hope Howson hits one from 30 yards then as that''s the only way that lineup is going to score.

[ZLF 274]

hopefully he will :-)

but playing 4 in the middle and two up front means we will concede more than we can score...

its the midfield creating nothing unfortunately

[Mr Brownstone 0]

West Ham have no fit strikers and are flooding the midfield. If we play a 4 man midfield we''ll be overrun.

The only way we could play 2 up top is if we play a 3-5-2, that was always a disaster under Lambert, although with Olsson and Whittaker as wing backs it might work.

[the bristol nest 0]

Ruddy

Martin Bennett Turner Olsson

Whittaker

Redmond Fer Howson

Pilks

Rvw

[Move Klose 303]

Obviously going to be:

Ruddy

Martin Turner Bassong Olsson

Snodgrass Johnson Fer Pilkington

Howson

Hooper

Bunn Bennett Whittaker Hoolahan Murphy Elmander Becchio

Hopefully a nice win, Hooper getting a goal and would love to see Becchio come on and get the winner, doubt he will even come on tho.

[BOO 0]

Your probably right Eadie.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Eadie''s lineup is the one I''m expecting.

 

If Snoddy''s not fully recovered, I would start Murphy.  In fact I would be tempted to start him anyway, in Redmond''s absence - at least he gives us something different.

[Jh1990 0]

Snodgrass is fully fit so Eadies line up is what I expect for sure , wish Johnson wasn''t in it but unfortunately I''m sure he will, will make the game alot harder to win with the amount of ball he will give away

[Indy 3,297]

I agree with  Eadies line up but not happy with playing Hooper, as much as I don''t rate Elmander that line up cries out for Elmander to start.

 

It lacks pace and it will be set up for getting the crosses into the box, so a battling big forward is required.

 

Had Redmond or Murphy started then their pace to get beyond the wing backs means they could get into the box and have that killer pass.

 

I hope that Johnson finds some form anlongside Fer, Bassong realises that he''s supposed to be a defender, Tunrer starts to talk with the players around him and Ruddy has an easy afternoon.

 

Anyhow, whatever the line up, just hope we can get that win!

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="Jh1990"]Snodgrass is fully fit so Eadies line up is what I expect for sure , wish Johnson wasn''t in it but unfortunately I''m sure he will, will make the game alot harder to win with the amount of ball he will give away[/quote]

 

I''d much rather have Tettey than Johnson but lets hope Johnson can get back to his form from last season.  Without Tettey I think Fer/Howson/BJ is still our best midfield lineup especially given West Ham are expected to pack the midfield.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Its Character Forming"]

[quote user="Jh1990"]Snodgrass is fully fit so Eadies line up is what I expect for sure , wish Johnson wasn''t in it but unfortunately I''m sure he will, will make the game alot harder to win with the amount of ball he will give away[/quote]

 

I''d much rather have Tettey than Johnson but lets hope Johnson can get back to his form from last season.  Without Tettey I think Fer/Howson/BJ is still our best midfield lineup especially given West Ham are expected to pack the midfield.

[/quote]I think the main issue here unfortunately, is that there is no one (other than Tettey when he''s fit) to really challenge BJ for the DM position.I''m sure Fer could play it, but I would much rather see him in an advanced role.

[hazza9 0]

3-5-2

GK. Ruddy

DC. Martin

DC. Bennett

DC. Bassong

RM. Snoddy

DM. Bradders

CM. Howson

CM. Fer

LM. Pilks

ST. Hoolahan

ST. Hooper

Subs; Bunn, Olsson, Turner, Redmond, Murphy, Elmander, Becchio

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Oh dear, hope that wasn''t serious.

4-3-3 as seen against Stoke and Cardiff

GK Ruddy

RB Martin

CB Bassong

CB Turner

LB Olsson

CM Fer

CM Johnson

CM Howson

RW Snodgrass

ST Hooper

LW Pilkington

Fer and Howson alternately breaking into the space Hooper should leave behind him if he makes the right diagonal runs off the shoulder of the centre backs. Provided Johnson stops getting dribbled (for such an AMAZING TACKLER he was the most dribbled past player in the league last season) and just wins the ball and releases it quickly to Fer or Howson to burst forward, we should be able to expose West Ham as the 4-6-0 forces them to run from deep as it did against Villa.

NB. Elmander is terrible in the hole, so would RvW be. Ricky is a lone striker, lets stop all this tosh about playing two up front which would force our midfield narrow and we''d get raped by any team with decent centre mids. Thanks.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,748]

Surely Hughton has to pair Hooper and Elmander to save his job tomorrow?

not to guarantee a win or anything like that but if he goes with obne striker and we lose, he''s pretty much signed his death warrant.

If he plays with 2 up front ,as the fans as been calling for, should we win, he can say it worked, if we lose ,he can the say that this was the reason he hadn''t played with 2 strikers for most of the season....at least he''d have an ''alibi''?

afterall didnt win our only home game of he season so far vs ''media darlings'' Southampton playing 2 up front?, isnt th\at sign alone that we should again tomorrow?

[ellis206 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Surely Hughton has to pair Hooper and Elmander to save his job tomorrow?

not to guarantee a win or anything like that but if he goes with obne striker and we lose, he''s pretty much signed his death warrant.

If he plays with 2 up front ,as the fans as been calling for, should we win, he can say it worked, if we lose ,he can the say that this was the reason he hadn''t played with 2 strikers for most of the season....at least he''d have an ''alibi''?

afterall didnt win our only home game of he season so far vs ''media darlings'' Southampton playing 2 up front?, isnt th\at sign alone that we should again tomorrow?

[/quote]

 

Playing 2 up front tomorrow against a side who generally have 6 in midfield would be suicide. We would be over run.

 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Surely Hughton has to pair Hooper and Elmander to save his job tomorrow?

not to guarantee a win or anything like that but if he goes with obne striker and we lose, he''s pretty much signed his death warrant.

If he plays with 2 up front ,as the fans as been calling for, should we win, he can say it worked, if we lose ,he can the say that this was the reason he hadn''t played with 2 strikers for most of the season....at least he''d have an ''alibi''?

afterall didnt win our only home game of he season so far vs ''media darlings'' Southampton playing 2 up front?, isnt th\at sign alone that we should again tomorrow?

[/quote]

 

Southampton also played 2 up front that day. 4-4-2 can work against other teams playing with 2 in the middle, but it becomes much tougher when playing teams with 3 in the middle who are happy to come and defend a point (as West Ham will be tomorrow).

 

Norwich have played 2 up on several occassions across Hughton''s reign - often with little success and people have always said after those games "let that be the end of people calling for 2 strikers". It never is the end of it though. Norwich played 2 up front against Villa - didn''t work then, or against Tottenham.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,748]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Surely Hughton has to pair Hooper and Elmander to save his job tomorrow?

not to guarantee a win or anything like that but if he goes with obne striker and we lose, he''s pretty much signed his death warrant.

If he plays with 2 up front ,as the fans as been calling for, should we win, he can say it worked, if we lose ,he can the say that this was the reason he hadn''t played with 2 strikers for most of the season....at least he''d have an ''alibi''?

afterall didnt win our only home game of he season so far vs ''media darlings'' Southampton playing 2 up front?, isnt th\at sign alone that we should again tomorrow?

[/quote]

 

Southampton also played 2 up front that day. 4-4-2 can work against other teams playing with 2 in the middle, but it becomes much tougher when playing teams with 3 in the middle who are happy to come and defend a point (as West Ham will be tomorrow).

 

Norwich have played 2 up on several occassions across Hughton''s reign - often with little success and people have always said after those games "let that be the end of people calling for 2 strikers". It never is the end of it though. Norwich played 2 up front against Villa - didn''t work then, or against Tottenham.

[/quote]

maybe all very sensible...that the time for that ,rightly or wrongly has been and gone.....I''ll stand by my notion that ,if we lose having played one striker tomorrow...in a game that we/he must win, it will cost him his job.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Well you can call me old fashioned but I hope he goes with the formation he thinks most likely to win.  And for the reasons people have covered above, that would be 3 in centre midfield and 1 up front.

[ellis206 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Surely Hughton has to pair Hooper and Elmander to save his job tomorrow?

not to guarantee a win or anything like that but if he goes with obne striker and we lose, he''s pretty much signed his death warrant.

If he plays with 2 up front ,as the fans as been calling for, should we win, he can say it worked, if we lose ,he can the say that this was the reason he hadn''t played with 2 strikers for most of the season....at least he''d have an ''alibi''?

afterall didnt win our only home game of he season so far vs ''media darlings'' Southampton playing 2 up front?, isnt th\at sign alone that we should again tomorrow?

[/quote]

 

Southampton also played 2 up front that day. 4-4-2 can work against other teams playing with 2 in the middle, but it becomes much tougher when playing teams with 3 in the middle who are happy to come and defend a point (as West Ham will be tomorrow).

 

Norwich have played 2 up on several occassions across Hughton''s reign - often with little success and people have always said after those games "let that be the end of people calling for 2 strikers". It never is the end of it though. Norwich played 2 up front against Villa - didn''t work then, or against Tottenham.

[/quote]

maybe all very sensible...that the time for that ,rightly or wrongly has been and gone.....I''ll stand by my notion that ,if we lose having played one striker tomorrow...in a game that we/he must win, it will cost him his job.

[/quote]

 

Its irrelevant how many strikers he''s played tomorrow, are you saying if we lost playing 2 up front he wouldn''t lose his job?

It''s only a pocketful of fans who seem to have an issue with only playing one up top, these fans seem to be uneducated or are just using it to fuel their vendetta against Hughton.

I believe that if we played 2 up front tomorrow against a team who will most likely have 6 in midfield, we will get hammered.

 

[Yella Foreva 0]

                               RuddyMartin          Turner          Bassong          OllsonSnodgrass     Howson       Fer                  Pilkington                               Hoolahan                               HooperSubsBunnBennetWhittakerJohnsonRedmond (If Fit) Murphy (If not)ElmanderBecchio

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Surely Hughton has to pair Hooper and Elmander to save his job tomorrow?

not to guarantee a win or anything like that but if he goes with obne striker and we lose, he''s pretty much signed his death warrant.

If he plays with 2 up front ,as the fans as been calling for, should we win, he can say it worked, if we lose ,he can the say that this was the reason he hadn''t played with 2 strikers for most of the season....at least he''d have an ''alibi''?

afterall didnt win our only home game of he season so far vs ''media darlings'' Southampton playing 2 up front?, isnt th\at sign alone that we should again tomorrow?

[/quote]

 

Southampton also played 2 up front that day. 4-4-2 can work against other teams playing with 2 in the middle, but it becomes much tougher when playing teams with 3 in the middle who are happy to come and defend a point (as West Ham will be tomorrow).

 

Norwich have played 2 up on several occassions across Hughton''s reign - often with little success and people have always said after those games "let that be the end of people calling for 2 strikers". It never is the end of it though. Norwich played 2 up front against Villa - didn''t work then, or against Tottenham.

[/quote]

maybe all very sensible...that the time for that ,rightly or wrongly has been and gone.....I''ll stand by my notion that ,if we lose having played one striker tomorrow...in a game that we/he must win, it will cost him his job.

[/quote]

The moment Hughton makes a tactical decision based on the opinion of fans is the moment he should be sacked. McNally isn''t an idiot when it comes to football luckily and he will know that just playing two strikers doesn''t make a team more attacking (it often has the reverse effect). Also, no manager should be sacked, or not sacked, based on one result.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,748]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

If however he trots out the same team with the same philiosophy that hasn''t worked for the last 11 months on a day that could possibly save or cost him his job...and he fails to get the necessary result..again......then he deserves to go.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

If however he trots out the same team with the same philiosophy that hasn''t worked for the last 11 months on a day that could possibly save or cost him his job...and he fails to get the necessary result..again......then he deserves to go.

[/quote]

If we call it 4-3-3 would that make it sound better to you ?

 

I just find it so frustrating that people think 2 strikers is "more attacking".  It''s not if your midfield is outnumbered and your strikers see little of the ball.  Much better to have 3 in centre midfield so 1 or 2 of them can regularly get forward plus your fullbacks have licence to get forward.  This way when you''re attacking, you''re putting up to 7 players into the attack.

[morty 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

If however he trots out the same team with the same philiosophy that hasn''t worked for the last 11 months on a day that could possibly save or cost him his job...and he fails to get the necessary result..again......then he deserves to go.

[/quote]They wouldn''t be forgiving though. No matter what he does tomorrow I don''t think he will change the mind of anyone who has already made it up.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

[/quote]

It''s a good thing they''d be so forgiving, because if he gave no thought whatsoever to the threat that the opposition bring, then he''s guaranteed to lose.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,748]

[quote user="Its Character Forming"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

If however he trots out the same team with the same philiosophy that hasn''t worked for the last 11 months on a day that could possibly save or cost him his job...and he fails to get the necessary result..again......then he deserves to go.

[/quote]

If we call it 4-3-3 would that make it sound better to you ?

 

I just find it so frustrating that people think 2 strikers is "more attacking".  It''s not if your midfield is outnumbered and your strikers see little of the ball.  Much better to have 3 in centre midfield so 1 or 2 of them can regularly get forward plus your fullbacks have licence to get forward.  This way when you''re attacking, you''re putting up to 7 players into the attack.

[/quote]

433 is fine is you have goals from midfield, we don''t , as was palpably evident vs Cardiff where chances fell to players where finishing was alien to them in scoring positions. For the the attacking intent Fer brings, how many league goals this season?, how many will get from Snodgrass in open play?, what will the combined goals tally between Tettey/Johnson be over a season?....if Howson is our 2nd most potent goals threat in and around the box, it says it all?

It still believe .in our particular case, given our personnel and given Hughtons failure to sign a goal scoring "no.10''" or 2nd striker in the summer, that playing 2 strikers is our most likely way of scoring goals and winning matches.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,748]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

[/quote]

It''s a good thing they''d be so forgiving, because if he gave no thought whatsoever to the threat that the opposition bring, then he''s guaranteed to lose.

[/quote]

unfortunately , he gives too much thought to this...to the detriment of us being an attacking threat.....thats kind of what the problem has been for most of 2013.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

If he has the courage, as a ''last hurrah'' , to attack from the off with 2 strikers and go all out for the win and not worry about what West Ham are doing, and then doesn''t win, I think the fans would be more forgiving. 

[/quote]

It''s a good thing they''d be so forgiving, because if he gave no thought whatsoever to the threat that the opposition bring, then he''s guaranteed to lose.

[/quote]

unfortunately , he gives too much thought to this...to the detriment of us being an attacking threat.....thats kind of what the problem has been for most of 2013.

[/quote]

He gives nowhere near the amount of thought to the opposition as Lambert did. I can''t recall Hughton ever changing both the vast majority of his team and his formation simply because he thought it would suit the opposition more.