Pilko Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 Lovenkrands bring absolutely nothing to the wing, he's a finisher and nothing else Which is a bit pointless considering this Saturday we carved out one or two decent-ish chances for him and he failed to hit the target with them. It brings back the whole Owen-type argument again, why bother playing the player who does fuck-all else but take chances when we're not making good chances? We've done that to death though, so we'll not do it again, unless you want me to talk about Martins for a bit. Having said that though, I reckon Lovenkrands was bullied out of the game this Saturday. He'd be more effective in the hole (ie where Nolan played against Ipswich) in front of two physical strikers, two of Carroll, Ranger, Shola and Harewood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Return of the entertainers eh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Similar to Owen, you put Lovenkrands in a position where he needs to use strength or guile and he'll come off second best the vast majority of the time. I'm glad he's here though because alongside a Carroll or Shola he'll likely get in behind a hell of a lot with his acceleration and slot them away. That said, with Harewood in the team I'd only ever put Lovenkrands on the bench, as I said before Saturday's game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest palnese Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 I reckon we will go back to playing one striker with Nolan in the hole. Raylor Guthrie Smith and Jonas in midfield. Or Guthrie will be dropped for Harewood and Nolan down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Lovenkrands bring absolutely nothing to the wing, he's a finisher and nothing else Which is a bit pointless considering this Saturday we carved out one or two decent-ish chances for him and he failed to hit the target with them. It brings back the whole Owen-type argument again, why bother playing the player who does fuck-all else but take chances when we're not making good chances? We've done that to death though, so we'll not do it again, unless you want me to talk about Martins for a bit. Having said that though, I reckon Lovenkrands was bullied out of the game this Saturday. He'd be more effective in the hole (ie where Nolan played against Ipswich) in front of two physical strikers, two of Carroll, Ranger, Shola and Harewood. I don't remember Lovenkrands having two decent chances to be honest. However he did setup Harewood for what should have been the opening goal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlacknWhiteArmy Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Similar to Owen, you put Lovenkrands in a position where he needs to use strength or guile and he'll come off second best the vast majority of the time. I'm glad he's here though because alongside a Carroll or Shola he'll likely get in behind a hell of a lot with his acceleration and slot them away. That said, with Harewood in the team I'd only ever put Lovenkrands on the bench, as I said before Saturday's game In all honesty Lovenkrands in behind Carroll and Ranger/Ameobi and he'll flourish. Similar to Nolan's roll against Ipswich. He's not stuck out wide where he's hugely limited, and he's not straight up against the centre back where he'll get bullied out of the game. In that role, his pace and finishing will cause the opposition huge trouble. Perhaps a bit too attacking for Hughton mind Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Similar to Owen, you put Lovenkrands in a position where he needs to use strength or guile and he'll come off second best the vast majority of the time. I'm glad he's here though because alongside a Carroll or Shola he'll likely get in behind a hell of a lot with his acceleration and slot them away. That said, with Harewood in the team I'd only ever put Lovenkrands on the bench, as I said before Saturday's game Yep. Just cos Harewood's strong doesn't mean he's going to hold the ball up as well as Carroll, for example. In Harewood and Lovenkrands, we've got two 'off-the-shoulder' strikers (if that's what you wanna call it, you know what i mean - 'second' strikers...) and it didn't work. Carroll came on however and was controlling all the aeiral balls that came his way. Him and Harewood will work really well cos they've got the attributes that bounce off each other. Carroll can win it in the air and hold the ball up/Harewood's got the pace and strength to power through. Plus, they can both smack it away. In all honesty Lovenkrands in behind Carroll and Ranger/Ameobi and he'll flourish. Similar to Nolan's roll against Ipswich. He's not stuck out wide where he's hugely limited, and he's not straight up against the centre back where he'll get bullied out of the game. In that role, his pace and finishing will cause the opposition huge trouble. Totally agree with that, aswell. Teams will bab themselves knowing they've got a three-pronged attack of Carroll/Harewood and Lovenkrands to deal with. It'd be very diverse. But i'm happy with Nolan there aswell. I'd really like to see more of the diamond. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 5 tickets on my doormat today Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jeffers09 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Ordered mine first day of member’s sale and still haven’t arrived Wondering what the hold up is Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Ordered mine first day of member’s sale and still haven’t arrived Wondering what the hold up is Why don't you phone them up and ask? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Similar to Owen, you put Lovenkrands in a position where he needs to use strength or guile and he'll come off second best the vast majority of the time. I'm glad he's here though because alongside a Carroll or Shola he'll likely get in behind a hell of a lot with his acceleration and slot them away. That said, with Harewood in the team I'd only ever put Lovenkrands on the bench, as I said before Saturday's game Yep. Just cos Harewood's strong doesn't mean he's going to hold the ball up as well as Carroll, for example. In Harewood and Lovenkrands, we've got two 'off-the-shoulder' strikers (if that's what you wanna call it, you know what i mean - 'second' strikers...) and it didn't work. Not to be pedantic, but a second striker is something completely different. A second striker will drop deep and attempt to create a la Bergkamp Sheringham, Bellamy and Baggio. You were right the first time though, Harewood's an on the shoulder type. If we can employ somelike like Carroll to do the chasing and muscling, big Marlon will fly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 4-5-1 Ranger uptop alone long ball works, 4-5-1 Carroll uptop long ball don't work flickon go's to no fker. We need 4-4-2 with a mix of long ball and ball on the deck football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jeffers09 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Ordered mine first day of member’s sale and still haven’t arrived Wondering what the hold up is Why don't you phone them up and ask? The charge is shocking. will have to phone tommrow if they dont come. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 How on earth does 4-5-1 with Ranger up front alone work? We've played it twice and looked no attacking threat whatsoever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Well first off anyone who suggests Nolan playing alongside Smith in a 442 wants their heads examined, i won't even go into what Nolan lacks as a centre midfield player. As for the strikers Carroll and Ranger, so far, can only be described as a "handfull" because they lack real threat infront of goal. From my point of view we should line up like this; Harper Simpson Taylor Coloccini Enrique Smith Guthrie Taylor Jonas Nolan Harewood Reluctantly leaving out Zurab. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Nolan doesn't score goals when he plays up front though, he's not even a handful. He scores his goals from midfield, all he does when he plays up front is lumber around and waste a place in the side. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 You could play Nolan at left back and he would still score, the man is a machine! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 From my point of view we should line up like this; Harper Simpson Taylor Coloccini Enrique Smith Guthrie Taylor Jonas Nolan Harewood Reluctantly leaving out Zurab. I would be happy with this and I think it's currently our best starting eleven. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 You could play Nolan at left back and he would still score, the man is a machine! He'd probably be much more likely to score from left back then as part of a front two No way should Nolan ever start up front for us when we have Ranger, Carroll, Lovenkrands and Harewood all fit. He hasn't got the mobility and gets too easily marked out of games, he's also no good at hold up play. In midfield he's marked less and can break into the box late which is what he's best at. He definitely has to be in the team at the moment, but putting him up front as part of a front two would totally neutralism any threat he has, just like every other time he's played up front this season. Either we play him in midfield or we play him as part of a front three (or a five man midfield with Nolan in between the strikers and midfield). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Nolan could start in goal and I'd tip him to score ahead of Smith. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I'd tip Harper to score ahead of Smith. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Harper Simpson Taylor Coloccini Enrique Smith Guthrie Jonas Nolan Carroll Harewood Good balance in that side iyam, plenty of goals in Carroll, Harewood, Nolan and even Guthrie and a lot of protection for the back four. Slightly worried Jonas might be a bit knackered after having played with Argentina on Wednesday night though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Nolan could start in goal and I'd tip him to score ahead of Smith. Christ, start him on the subs bench and he's just as likely to score as Smith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Harper Zurab - Taylor - Coloccini - Enrique Guthrie - Nolan - Smith - Jonas Harewood - Lovenkrands Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I'd definitely play Carroll and Harewood up front together for this one. Maybe what Towelie posted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts