Optimistic Nut Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 To think last time we played at Forest we were ripping the piss out of him...now he's ours. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I agree with Towelie and Mowen about the strikers, Carroll and Harewood is probably our best bet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCW1983 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 We have, have, have to win this, were going down and my lass and her family are all Forest supporters ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzle Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. Carroll was only rested against Bristol City, it would be harsh to drop him as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. Carroll was only rested against Bristol City, it would be harsh to drop him as well. Simple then, drop Harewood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 We have, have, have to win this, were going down and my lass and her family are all Forest supporters ! Aye I'm stopping over with Forest supporting family, so really don't want to be on the losing side. Just in case though, I've already formulated plan B which will be to get very drunk and puke all over their carpet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. Lovenkrands was completely ineffective against Bristol City. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. Lovenkrands was completely ineffective against Bristol City. Agreed, apart from setting up Harewood to hit the post and two half chances that he wasted, he served up bugger all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I quite like him but at the moment would not be in my starting XI. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. Lovenkrands was completely ineffective against Bristol City. Disagree. He made some good runs but didn't get the service. Most of the time he had the ball, he looked like he would make something happen and created one of the best chances of the match. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Fair enough but I don't think many would agree with you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. i thought he was nowhere to be seen, especially in the first half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Harper Simpson Taylor Coloccini Enrique Taylor Smith Nolan Jonas Harewood Carroll Honestly, that's the only lineup i'd trust to score goals right now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. i thought he was nowhere to be seen, especially in the first half. He is sh**e to be fair. His channels of running are wrong he cannot finish for sh** he is very inefective as a striker, don't get me started as a winger! And rememebr he wasn't even commited when we went down, he was looking for other teams, when they realised he was pi** poor they didn't sign him... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. considering Harewood is a much better player and Carroll suits his style of play better than other strikers, the attack picks itself. I can see Hughton fucking it up again though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. i thought he was nowhere to be seen, especially in the first half. He is sh**e to be fair. His channels of running are wrong he cannot finish for sh** he is very inefective as a striker, don't get me started as a winger! And rememebr he wasn't even commited when we went down, he was looking for other teams, when they realised he was pi** poor they didn't sign him... stupid post tbh he's a good finisher and a pretty decent striker because of that and his acceleration. He has nowt else going for him though and should never be played on the wing ever again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. i thought he was nowhere to be seen, especially in the first half. He is sh**e to be fair. His channels of running are wrong he cannot finish for sh** he is very inefective as a striker, don't get me started as a winger! And rememebr he wasn't even commited when we went down, he was looking for other teams, when they realised he was pi** poor they didn't sign him... stupid post tbh he's a good finisher and a pretty decent striker because of that and his acceleration. He has nowt else going for him though and should never be played on the wing ever again. It is nice see you give us advance warning on what your gonna post now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. i thought he was nowhere to be seen, especially in the first half. Do you think the invisible man set Harewood up for that chance in the first half like? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Quite interesting that people are suggesting Carroll and Harewood up front. I thought Lovenkrands looked dangerous against Bristol City and it would be harsh to drop him. i thought he was nowhere to be seen, especially in the first half. Do you think the invisible man set Harewood up for that chance in the first half like? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 It is nice see you give us advance warning on what you're gonna post now. fyp Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 It is nice see you give us advance warning on what you're gonna post now. fyp Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCW1983 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 We have, have, have to win this, were going down and my lass and her family are all Forest supporters ! Aye I'm stopping over with Forest supporting family, so really don't want to be on the losing side. Just in case though, I've already formulated plan B which will be to get very drunk and puke all over their carpet. If we get close to losing im on that pitch, worked in the 70's it will work now ! :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Our matches on TV have been good to us. I'm going for a 3-1 win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Nolan could start in goal and I'd tip him to score ahead of Smith. This is the dilemma for me. Players like Nolan are coming up with goals, sometimes against the run of play, yet it's their utter lack of running and ability on the ball which means we often are out-played by 2nd rate football teams. Smith hasn't score any but he's still been MOM far more times than Nolan which tells it's own story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts