4-4-2 advocates (1 Viewer)

[dongonzalos]

We created better chances once we reverted to two up top.
We didn't concede playing that way either.

 

---

[Grendel]

Naive performance, especially at 4-4-2, because we were trying to hoof it in or cross it into the box too much v 6"+ defenders who were comfortable in the air whereas we can't score headers.

We have loads of set-pieces , but we are terrible at attacking them.

Clarke and Fleck did good.

Please don't keep embarrassing yourself. You're wrong you look foolish just admit it.

The comment about fleck us hilarious. Painful though I just broke a rib laughing so much.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Please don't keep embarrassing yourself. You're wrong you look foolish just admit it.

The comment about fleck us hilarious. Painful though I just broke a rib laughing so much.

Are you the David Bell of your office with that kind of injury record?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Please don't keep embarrassing yourself. You're wrong you look foolish just admit it.

The comment about fleck us hilarious. Painful though I just broke a rib laughing so much.

I think you need to look in mirror pal, you were the claiming 'we need to play 2 upfront' in such a prophetic manner, well, you were wrong, because 4-4-2 hasn't done anything yet! Have we scored more than 2 whilst playing it? Off the top off my head, no.

Fleck did well, but as usual, you'd rate him 3 points lower than the worst player, such is the limitations of a zealots' analysis. I thought Murph, Elliott, J. Clarke were our best players, Fleck did well when he came on, couple of good passes, looks a lot slimmer btw, not enough time for him to impact the game IMO. I don't think any of the starting midfield did well at all, Bailey got off to a good start then faded. Christie and Blair Adams were shit, Edj was shite, Wood was OK, Murph was fantastic, a massive overhaul is needed as some players have become VERY complacent o late.