Swansea(home)predictions

[AucklandRover]

The thing is, though, Champs, if Gallagher plays at No.9, Armstrong doesn't, and he doesn't do half as much work as SG when he's out wider. Apparently, Nyambe's and Gallagher's work-rate statistics are well ahead of the others.
I wouldn't mind Armstrong being given a chance to do Dack's job, instead. However, this is clearly something that has been tried and rejected.
Armstrong doesn't seem to have many "ok" games. I know I'm exaggerating a bit, but he's either very good or anonymous!
I have never accepted in our situation that this "play people in their correct positions" argument is as straightforward as supporters make out.
Look at our forwards when Dack is missing: Gallagher, Graham, Brereton, Armstrong, Samuel - they all want the No.9 shirt. (Thank heavens Butterworth isn't fit, or there would be six of them!) There is no easy or satisfactory way around this. I see arguments about fielding a proper winger (Chapman, presumably), and I'm not set against that by any means, but what would the formation be? Would we have to use twin No.9s?
Mowbray has "solved" the problem by playing as many forwards as possible. At one point on Saturday, I though we were going to have six on!
To some extent, it's a false issue, in any case. When you look closely, on the occasions when Gallagher is out wide, he moves into the centre, anyway, when the attack is down the other flank, thus becoming an extra "centre-forward". I think TM simply expects them to be flexible.
On the other points:
1) That was definitely the best Brereton has looked.
2) That was definitely the worst Tosin has looked since his first couple of games.
3) Bell is doing all right, but it still looks to me as if his primary aim is to avoid making mistakes. I wish he would score a screamer. It might be all he needs to put more confidence into his game.

Thinking about having both Gallagher and Brereton on does my head in a bit, in terms of formation.
When available, the nailed-on players are;
Walton, Nyambe, Lenihan, Tosin, Bell, Travis, Armstrong. (I'm not counting Dack and Evans).
That's seven.
Gallagher, Johnson and Rothwell are probably next in line. Ten.
So if we want Brereton in, that's it!
Line-up?
Walton
Nyambe Lenihan Tosin Bell
Rothwell Travis Johnson Armstrong
Gallagher Brereton.

Would that be it? It just doesn't seem very likely to me, although it would be very interesting to see how it worked.

[Saxo1man41]

Armstrong back to being not good enough after one indifferent game..??!!!

[AucklandRover]

Armstrong back to being not good enough after one indifferent game..??!!!

I don't think Champs meant quite that, Saxo.
It's more to do with the fact that when he isn't looking sharp in the box, he doesn't contribute much else.
Given his size, pace and trickery. I always thought he was ideal for the No.10 position (or whatever you like to call Dack's role), but Mowbray clearly thinks that both Rothwell and Buckley are better choices for that slot, and Armstrong himself prefers centre-forward.
It's difficult not to have AA on the pitch, and I don't mind the idea of "carrying" your luxury player when he has an off-day, because he might still come up with a moment of brilliance. It does raise another issue, though. Does it make sense to have both Armstrong and Rothwell on the pitch at the same time? You don't get much "off the ball" from either of them.

Going a bit broader, it's weird how football works out sometimes.
Our defence virtually picks itself, but the "front six" - Travis excepted - is the subject of endless debate and numerous possibilities!!

For the moment, the back three experiment has been put to one side (for obvious reasons), but in the continued absence of Dack and Evans, I reckon a case could be made for:
Walton
Tosin Lenihan Williams
Nyambe Travis Johnson Bell
Rothwell
Gallagher Armstrong.

I would only try it against "weaker" teams, however, and I'm not sure that word applies to many clubs in this year's Championship!

[Saxo1man41]

I don't think Champs meant quite that, Saxo.
It's more to do with the fact that when he isn't looking sharp in the box, he doesn't contribute much else.
Given his size, pace and trickery. I always thought he was ideal for the No.10 position (or whatever you like to call Dack's role), but Mowbray clearly thinks that both Rothwell and Buckley are better choices for that slot, and Armstrong himself prefers centre-forward.
It's difficult not to have AA on the pitch, and I don't mind the idea of "carrying" your luxury player when he has an off-day, because he might still come up with a moment of brilliance. It does raise another issue, though. Does it make sense to have both Armstrong and Rothwell on the pitch at the same time? You don't get much "off the ball" from either of them.

Going a bit broader, it's weird how football works out sometimes.
Our defence virtually picks itself, but the "front six" - Travis excepted - is the subject of endless debate and numerous possibilities!!

For the moment, the back three experiment has been put to one side (for obvious reasons), but in the continued absence of Dack and Evans, I reckon a case could be made for:
Walton
Tosin Lenihan Williams
Nyambe Travis Johnson Bell
Rothwell
Gallagher Armstrong.

I would only try it against "weaker" teams, however, and I'm not sure that word applies to many clubs in this year's Championship!

Going back to your direct answer, AA contributes far more than Rhodes ever did(in his goalless games) as a forward.. nobody suggested he wasn't upto it..!

I see a lot of Josh king about AA.. he'll only be missed when he's gone, doing the biz elsewhere..

[champs95]

Going back to your direct answer, AA contributes far more than Rhodes ever did(in his goalless games) as a forward.. nobody suggested he wasn't upto it..!

I see a lot of Josh king about AA.. he'll only be missed when he's gone, doing the biz elsewhere..

Jordan Rhodes had also scored more by Sept than Armstrong scores in a full season, playing every game. Not many come close in terms of goalscoring. If you bag 25/30 goals a season, it actually doesn't matter what else you do. There where another 10 who weren't doing their bit. That was the only reason we didnt go up when we had him. Nobody we have had since even comes close to getting what he did, every single season. Abd he rarely didnt score.

I didnt say Arma wasnt good enough. I just don't feel centre forward is the correct position. Gallagher is a nightmare to play against. So is Brereton. That strike partnership will be the one starting next season, you will see. Arma as more of a winger.

[Saxo1man41]

For the record, I thought the whole team played below par v Swansea.. we created chances with long ball.. I don't have a problem with that, but it was because our normal game wasn't effective.

[champs95]

For the record, I thought the whole team played below par v Swansea.. we created chances with long ball.. I don't have a problem with that, but it was because our normal game wasn't effective.

If Swansea played us with 4 of their best players missing, I think we would better them. As we would most sides. The truth is, even with half a team we look hist as good as the likes of Brentford and Swansea. They wouldn't lay a glove on us if they lost all their key players.
I feel that's an achievement in itself.

[AucklandRover]

By the end of Rhodes' stay, Saxo, I think quite a lot of people had decided that building the whole team around him was an idea past its best!
I'm quite happy that we have so many options, although it might get a bit crazy when everybody is fit.
I have no idea at the moment which combination will turn out to be the best in the forward positions. Perhaps "none" is the answer, and we we will continue to see "horses for courses".

[Saxo1man41]

I think the Brentford and Swansea performances were chalk and cheese.. we were excellent against Brentford, exciting and dynamic.. Swansea game was dull in reality.

[Saxo1man41]

I think horses for courses is what TM does, even if I have the belief that you should have a best 11..