[lindo-spireite]

Even if it doesn't get a price tag on them, it makes it easier to move them on at the end of the season if we feel the wage can be better used elsewhere.

[Wooden Spoon]

SpireiteJN, on 27 November 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

A strikeforce of Madine and Clarke sounds pretty tasty.

be a few goals in that pair in this division........................does anyone know what is happening with Magrietter? is he anywhere near fitness, and when does his loan end?

This post has been edited by a kick in the balls: 28 November 2014 - 09:46 AM

[JonB]

a kick in the balls, on 28 November 2014 - 09:45 AM, said:

be a few goals in that pair in this division........................does anyone know what is happening with Magrietter? is he anywhere near fitness, and when does his loan end?

Margreitter came on for the final few mins v Barnsley so suggests he is fit to play!

[Wooden Spoon]

JonB, on 28 November 2014 - 09:51 AM, said:

Margreitter came on for the final few mins v Barnsley so suggests he is fit to play!

I`d look at him, Evatt and Hird (or Raglan)as a back 3 then, allowing our full backs the licence to push forward while offering a bit more defensive cover.




.................Lee

......Hird...Evatt....GM

Dave..Ryan..Morsy..Jones

..Roberts..Doyle..Clucas




If we needed to go 4-4-2, Jones drops back, Clucas goes left wing. No need for any subs. If we needed to go 4-2-3-1 same as above, but Roberts drops in behind Doyle, and again no need for any subs.




I wonder if we could extend his loan for the season in jan?

[JonB]

Been mentioned lots but for me i dont see the point in doing it...not sure what else it gives us. Its effectively removing one of the attacking players for a defender.

[Paragon of Virtue]

Switching to a back 3 would require a lot of work on the training ground for it get results. In the position we are in I don't think it would make much sense, we're better sticking with what we know.

[JonB]

LosMillonarios, on 28 November 2014 - 10:33 AM, said:

Switching to a back 3 would require a lot of work on the training ground for it get results. In the position we are in I don't think it would make much sense, we're better sticking with what we know.

Thats the other thing as well....why switch to a system that i suspect we've never used in training let alone on the pitch.

[lindave]

Spire-Power, on 27 November 2014 - 02:55 PM, said:

I would be disappointed if Banks left permanently as I think he has a lot to offer. Of course Johnson would be a big bonus.

Agreed.

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

lindave, on 28 November 2014 - 08:07 PM, said:

Agreed.

Over the years I think town have been held back by sentimentality a times and we've given players contracts when they shouldn't have gotten them.

If we were getting the Banks back that came into the team and made such an impact that's great. If we get the one that looks half fit and half interested since coming back from injury then we should let him go.

It may be a lack of match fitness, it may be the injury has taken it out of him and he won't be the same again, he may come back all guns blazing, but one thing we shouldn't do is make any decisions until we see what it does for him. I think it's make or break for him

[fishini]

a kick in the balls, on 28 November 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

I`d look at him, Evatt and Hird (or Raglan)as a back 3 then, allowing our full backs the licence to push forward while offering a bit more defensive cover.




.................Lee

......Hird...Evatt....GM

Dave..Ryan..Morsy..Jones

..Roberts..Doyle..Clucas




If we needed to go 4-4-2, Jones drops back, Clucas goes left wing. No need for any subs. If we needed to go 4-2-3-1 same as above, but Roberts drops in behind Doyle, and again no need for any subs.




I wonder if we could extend his loan for the season in jan?

Jeez not so long ago lots were moaning about PC tinkering with the team and altering a winning formula. Now you are advocating him doing it again

[dim view]

Ernie Ernie Ernie, on 28 November 2014 - 08:13 PM, said:

Over the years I think town have been held back by sentimentality a times and we've given players contracts when they shouldn't have gotten them.

If we were getting the Banks back that came into the team and made such an impact that's great. If we get the one that looks half fit and half interested since coming back from injury then we should let him go.

It may be a lack of match fitness, it may be the injury has taken it out of him and he won't be the same again, he may come back all guns blazing, but one thing we shouldn't do is make any decisions until we see what it does for him. I think it's make or break for him

O'Toole playing for Sarfend, Banks playing for Norfampton.