Well, looking at the formation he put out yesterday...
I'd have gone with Gallacher; Drury, Doherty, Shackell, Colin; Etuhu; Eagle, Hughes, Robinson, Croft; Dublin.
Of course, Dublin up top on his own means that Eagle and Croft need to put the work in to get up and down to support him - or Robinson / Hughes to push on and get on the end of flick-downs - or else it's not going to work (as was proved yesterday).
Why he dropped Eagle and Gallacher after good performances at Port Vale I've no idea, and to change a back-four that's kept three clean sheets in a row seems very odd. There was obviously a plan in playing the 4-1-4-1, but Grant got the personnel wrong on the day.
Another option could have been a basic 4-4-2 with Gallacher; Drury, Doherty, Shackell, Colin; Eagle, Etuhu, Robinson, Croft; Dublin, Thorne - keeps height in the team to compete with Stoke and would provide an extra man in the box to try and get on the end of crosses from Croft and Eagle.
There's two ways to play against Stoke - pass around them, threading balls through (which we didn't have the personnel for on the day), or directly compete with them. We went for that, yet sacrificed a front-man for it. With only Dublin up front we were always going to struggle for opportunities in front of goal.
Posted By: Declan on October 29th 2006 at 12:49:32
Message Thread
- Grant - the first doubts emerge (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 12:18:48
- So what would your team be with those injuries? (n/m) (NCFC) - Army Boy, Oct 29, 12:39:01
- Well, looking at the formation he put out yesterday... (NCFC) - Declan, Oct 29, 12:49:32
- Well it would not have had Fleming, or Hughes in it or had the Doc at cm! (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 12:45:09
- probably right but the last point is most valid, there isn't a lot of depth (NCFC) - Army Boy, Oct 29, 12:53:18
- Yes maybe he's doing a "worthy" and putting out a bad team to shock the board into action! (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 13:00:25
- It worked for all the fans !!! (n/m) (NCFC) - Army Boy, Oct 29, 13:17:21
- Yes maybe he's doing a "worthy" and putting out a bad team to shock the board into action! (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 13:00:25
- probably right but the last point is most valid, there isn't a lot of depth (NCFC) - Army Boy, Oct 29, 12:53:18
- You have mail (n/m) (NCFC) - Superstar D J, Oct 29, 12:24:53
- Where? (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 12:30:19
- work address. (n/m) (NCFC) - Superstar D J, Oct 29, 12:36:36
- Yes v interesting - I suppose Leicester don't have our fearsome reputation!!! (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 12:46:22
- work address. (n/m) (NCFC) - Superstar D J, Oct 29, 12:36:36
- Where? (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 12:30:19
- PS sorry about the spelling and typing - am still irate! (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Oct 29, 12:20:02
- So what would your team be with those injuries? (n/m) (NCFC) - Army Boy, Oct 29, 12:39:01
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.