Jacko can be singled out for that, unfortunately
we were never going to launch players forward in support while nobody can have been confident he'd hold it up. Not his game at all, and Hoots probably knew that but had no options. Better Jacko than Kane in a fruitless formation. The question is, and I don't know the answer, shouldn't we have set up differently, knowing we didn't have a realistic lone striker?
Posted By: Sugbad The Bad on January 12th 2013 at 17:28:42
Message Thread
- Poor today (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 12, 17:09:58
- Jacko can be singled out for that, unfortunately (NCFC) - Sugbad The Bad, Jan 12, 17:28:42
- Hoots fault for not changing the tactics. Should have had two strikers. (n/m) (NCFC) - Common Sense Police, Jan 12, 17:43:50
- Hoot's* (n/m) (NCFC) - Common Sense Police, Jan 12, 17:44:03
- Hoots fault for not changing the tactics. Should have had two strikers. (n/m) (NCFC) - Common Sense Police, Jan 12, 17:43:50
- Probably 2 strikers needed (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Jan 12, 17:13:40
- To the bar. (n/m) (NCFC) - bird table, Jan 12, 17:16:36
- Well put (n/m) (NCFC) - essexcanaryOTBC, Jan 12, 17:10:52
- Jacko can be singled out for that, unfortunately (NCFC) - Sugbad The Bad, Jan 12, 17:28:42
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.