It's Quiet 32 - enter at own risk

blueparrot said:
I know, it’s really cost us having just two the last two years.
Click to expand...
Having two strikers is ok in part because we have wing depth that can play centrally as well if needed. Subtracting an attacker without replacement leaves the squad vulnerable to an injury for no reason.
 
cjn said:
Having two strikers is ok in part because we have wing depth that can play centrally as well if needed. Subtracting an attacker without replacement leaves the squad vulnerable to an injury for no reason.
Click to expand...

Two strikers hasn’t hindered us in the main, because our build up play is the best around. Hence the number of tap-ins, with players arriving late. But, in some games we have lacked a killer instinct and been a bit wasteful, and the option of another striker would give us flexibility, that a 65 game season requires
 
cjn said:
Having two strikers is ok in part because we have wing depth that can play centrally as well if needed. Subtracting an attacker without replacement leaves the squad vulnerable to an injury for no reason.
Click to expand...
Apart from the reason that it would need to be a striker as good as the 2 we have that was happy to hardly play. It would take a squad place currently taken up by one of our attacking / midfield players.. so if we bring in a third centre forward who are you getting rid of ?
 
Stoned Rose said:
The bit about Sane would be genuinely worrying imo.
Click to expand...
Why? I think it’s clear from the players we are targeting that we want to play considerably more often with wing backs instead of wingers. Cancelo and Angelino, added to Mendy, gives us that possibility. Plus, Sané is only our 3rd choice winger, so the change is to give more minutes to Mahrez and a change tactically to let Mendy/Angelino/Cancelo be the width more often. If we are wanting to play with wing backs more than we do currently, we should not be worried about losing a winger and gaining a wing back. If anything it gives us more flexibility.
 
blueparrot said:
Apart from the reason that it would need to be a striker as good as the 2 we have that was happy to hardly play. It would take a squad place currently taken up by one of our attacking / midfield players.. so if we bring in a third centre forward who are you getting rid of ?
Click to expand...
Sorry if unclear, I'm not actually suggesting bringing in a third striker. I'm saying if we sell Sane I think we need to replace him because our wing depth, in addition to the obvious benefits, also helps us get away with only having Sergio and Gabe because if one got hurt during the year one of the wingers could step into the middle if needed as well.
 
SWP's back said:
We used to play 442 and change both strikers at 60-70 minutes. We now play one striker and have several that can cover as a false 9.


Two is more than enough
Click to expand...

Given Sterling especially plays a fair bit as second striker or a false 9 in a lot of our games too.
 
Tricky_Trev said:
Why? I think it’s clear from the players we are targeting that we want to play considerably more often with wing backs instead of wingers. Cancelo and Angelino, added to Mendy, gives us that possibility. Plus, Sané is only our 3rd choice winger, so the change is to give more minutes to Mahrez and a change tactically to let Mendy/Angelino/Cancelo be the width more often. If we are wanting to play with wing backs more than we do currently, we should not be worried about losing a winger and gaining a wing back. If anything it gives us more flexibility.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t be looking at those potential signings to mean we’re going to a 5 at the back system. Angelino by all accounts is an opportunistic buy rather than a planned purchase with zero consequences given he provides cover in a problem position where there’s injury concerns, costs peanuts and doesn’t take up a squad space. Cancelo will only come as a direct replacement for Danilo if he choses to leave who is an attacking fullback himself and all reports are suggesting we’re not desperate to show him the door.

Granted that formation will be an option without relying on Mendy being fit but I doubt we will see it much if at all, it limits the amount of technicians Pep can get in the middle of the park at once, which we know from his own words he favours doing and why we’ve seen Bernardo out wide a lot and those weird experimental formations where we had about 6 central midfielders on the pitch at once against arsenal
 
Tricky_Trev said:
Why? I think it’s clear from the players we are targeting that we want to play considerably more often with wing backs instead of wingers. Cancelo and Angelino, added to Mendy, gives us that possibility. Plus, Sané is only our 3rd choice winger, so the change is to give more minutes to Mahrez and a change tactically to let Mendy/Angelino/Cancelo be the width more often. If we are wanting to play with wing backs more than we do currently, we should not be worried about losing a winger and gaining a wing back. If anything it gives us more flexibility.
Click to expand...

That’s poor wumming by your usual standards Trevor.

The bit where you said we’d be relying on Mendy, who’s proven over 2 seasons, is never fit was a whopper and it just went further downhill from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top