After the truly terrifying passive aggressive badgering for a MT, when at work, from a certain nameless poster who resides in Liverpool, I have brought the thread forward by half an hour.
Paul Warne's first game at Pride Park will be a fascinating encounter. Already the seeds of the new style of play was apparent at the Cambridge game and it seems to suit the rigours of League 1 rather than the tika taka that we were all bored of.
Nothing has really happened in the wider world of any interest apart from a conference, a run on the £, a £65bn prop up and a realisation that I am #antigrowth. I'm gutted.
Saturday will see a large crowd at PP - Port Vale have sold out their allocation and desperate Stokies have resorted to buying tickets for the North Stand but be Warned the passive, sit down and polite NSers are prepared.
Lets see how we go on Saturday - we're certainly on the right trajectory and nobody said it would be easy......
In a nutshell, Vidal
I'm struggling to see how well PW can achieve what he wants with the current crop of players.
Early days, but I expect to see a fair bit of activity in the Jan window, if he has room to manouevre.
Well, having just watched the highlights on youtube we had enough chances to have buried Vale. But as ever, they took their chances and we didnt take ours. Equally we showed a level of naivety which will not get us out of L1.
I would love to have a fully fit Bielik back with us even though that would add another selection headache.
But looking at what we have right now it is certainly up for debate as to how to accommodate M-L and Barks. For me, they must play and I would much prefer to see them used up front and not as WBs. How refreshing and rare to see two (yes two!) wingers who can skin a full-back on the outside and not just on the inside AND put in telling crosses. They could be constant threats if used as LR used them.
And that raises this question - is there any reason why PW cannot use the same formation/personnel as LR used but adding the PW required intensity? It would unfortunately mean Collins notionally playing on his own up front but if the midfield gets fit enough one or more could well be able to give him more support than he had pre PW.
I think that would be the best of the available possibilities Chicago, but under Rosenior Bird and Hourihane did not play well together and neither are what you might call "intense" players as Warne seems to want. Maybe if Smith came in for one of them that would be the best fit.
I agree with that Vidal and really rate Smith. It may be sacrilege to say it but I'm not always convinced Connor should play. I'm really glad we have him but with all our available midfielders and possible substitutions to play with there should be scope for permutation.
comment by Chicagoram (U22653)
posted 5 hours, 17 minutes ago
I would love to have a fully fit Bielik back with us even though that would add another selection headache.
But looking at what we have right now it is certainly up for debate as to how to accommodate M-L and Barks. For me, they must play and I would much prefer to see them used up front and not as WBs. How refreshing and rare to see two (yes two!) wingers who can skin a full-back on the outside and not just on the inside AND put in telling crosses. They could be constant threats if used as LR used them.
And that raises this question - is there any reason why PW cannot use the same formation/personnel as LR used but adding the PW required intensity? It would unfortunately mean Collins notionally playing on his own up front but if the midfield gets fit enough one or more could well be able to give him more support than he had pre PW.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS Chicago!!!
I've been thinking this all week if we have players best suited to playing as wingers , one who has publicly indicated he does not want to play as a WB then why not look at changing our attack to accommodate wingers?
