Three up top at Accrington

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

Would it not be great to get the excitement factor back and go for a pacey all or nothing attack to kick start our season.

Villa did at Arsenal - lets go three up front, but built on a solid back four and midfield three who take no nonsense.

--------------Brown----------------

Keith-----Troy----Stevo----Jones

---Penn-----Taylor----Richards---

--Harrison---Stevie G---Vincent--

Stanley are not a great side and if went with that line up the middle three could boss it with the right attitude and Vincent and Byron could run their defence ragged with Gilly there to score and/or set-up.

That would give us options like CBB, Sido, McG, Deering to bring on if we need to go to a middle four or five to hold on to a lead late on and when Gilly and Vincent tire.

That would be a signal of intent, and would be a reward for the fans who travel who would be delighted to see power, aggression, pace and direct play towards the Stanley goal.

It would also prove to the players there are no outcasts or favourites and that you get in on merit and as the situation dictates.

If it paid off then fans and players would be chomping at the bit for the Hammers and Grimes' mob and it could set us up for a nice confident run in the League. If it didn't pay off then nothing lost in my view as at least we tried to shake things up following the the first three games.

[Joey]

I find it a bit odd that people seem to think we should completely change the entire formation and half of the starting line-up.

[Si Robin]

I believe there should be three changes personally, Lowe in for Brown, Jones in for CBB and Vincent in for Deering.

[51/84]

obviously you were not at the match yesterday RCS
Why would Yates commit to loosing 3 points
We need to go and be smart
AV has done nothing
Taylor Lowe and Jones have no match fitness
Penn had probably his worst game in memory

Stick too watching football on TV RCS

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

4-5-1 and hoofball will be more certain a defeat than going there attacking from the off.

[THECHOIRBOY]

This is not a dig at RCS but I think it is interesting that many fans were calling for 442 for a lot of last season and now many are already now calling for change.

Personally, I think what he does will depend a lot on fitness of Gornell but would not be surprised to see something back along the lines of 451/ 4-2-3-1

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

This is not a dig at RCS but I think it is interesting that many fans were calling for 442 for a lot of last season and now many are already now calling for change.

Personally, I think what he does will depend a lot on fitness of Gornell but would not be surprised to see something back along the lines of 451/ 4-2-3-1

I called for 4-4-2.

I still would like 4-4-2 but Vincent is not 100% and McG is off form so we have no wide-men.

[CS85]

Diamond for me........our wingers are shocking,atleast playing the diamond we can get shot of them.
I put my starting 11 up before the season started,didnt include our so called wingers.

[51/84]

Would it not be great to get the excitement factor back and go for a pacey all or nothing attack to kick start our season.

Villa did at Arsenal - lets go three up front, but built on a solid back four and midfield three who take no nonsense.

--------------Brown----------------

Keith-----Troy----Stevo----Jones

---Penn-----Taylor----Richards---

--Harrison---Stevie G---Vincent--

Stanley are not a great side and if went with that line up the middle three could boss it with the right attitude and Vincent and Byron could run their defence ragged with Gilly there to score and/or set-up.

That would give us options like CBB, Sido, McG, Deering to bring on if we need to go to a middle four or five to hold on to a lead late on and when Gilly and Vincent tire.

That would be a signal of intent, and would be a reward for the fans who travel who would be delighted to see power, aggression, pace and direct play towards the Stanley goal.

It would also prove to the players there are no outcasts or favourites and that you get in on merit and as the situation dictates.

If it paid off then fans and players would be chomping at the bit for the Hammers and Grimes' mob and it could set us up for a nice confident run in the League. If it didn't pay off then nothing lost in my view as at least we tried to shake things up following the the first three games.

Can you explain how the team you suggest is 4-4-2 - oh I forgot the players are not fit, or out of forum or want away
Stopping digging

[TheRaven]

Can you explain how the team you suggest is 4-4-2 - oh I forgot the players are not fit, or out of forum or want away
Stopping digging

He's not saying that's 4-4-2, he's saying that he was one who (last season) called for 4-4-2 instead of the 4-5-1. However, as he explains above, circumstances change and we appear to have no threat currently from the wings. As I'm sure you can't fail to have noticed.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

Would it not be great to get the excitement factor back and go for a pacey all or nothing attack to kick start our season.

Villa did at Arsenal - lets go three up front, but built on a solid back four and midfield three who take no nonsense.

--------------Brown----------------

Keith-----Troy----Stevo----Jones

---Penn-----Taylor----Richards---

--Harrison---Stevie G---Vincent--

Stanley are not a great side and if went with that line up the middle three could boss it with the right attitude and Vincent and Byron could run their defence ragged with Gilly there to score and/or set-up.

That would give us options like CBB, Sido, McG, Deering to bring on if we need to go to a middle four or five to hold on to a lead late on and when Gilly and Vincent tire.

That would be a signal of intent, and would be a reward for the fans who travel who would be delighted to see power, aggression, pace and direct play towards the Stanley goal.

It would also prove to the players there are no outcasts or favourites and that you get in on merit and as the situation dictates.

If it paid off then fans and players would be chomping at the bit for the Hammers and Grimes' mob and it could set us up for a nice confident run in the League. If it didn't pay off then nothing lost in my view as at least we tried to shake things up following the the first three games.

Can you explain how the team you suggest is 4-4-2 - oh I forgot the players are not fit, or out of forum or want away
Stopping digging

See The Raven's post - I was saying I called for 4-4-2, when the previous poster had said how people were calling for 4-4-2 last season. Pretty damn obvious.

Please please for the love of God, read the thread and posts and engage your brain before questioning me. I know you have an issue with me and want to question everything I say, but it's best for all if you do so only when you actually know what the post is and understand the content your are questioning.

[51/84]

I know you think I am thick and you are entitled your opinion
The thread is entitled 3 up top
So where in your original post do you suggest a 4-4-2 formation?
One further question , why do you always have to try and have the last word on every thread on here

[THECHOIRBOY]

Please please for the love of God, read the thread and posts and engage your brain before questioning me. I know you have an issue with me and want to question everything I say, but it's best for all if you do so only when you actually know what the post is and understand the content your are questioning.

I understood you RCS

I have not seen every game this season but based on Saturdays performance we cant play 442 with that line up. Problem for me remains the wingers and fullbacks more so than the core of the team. I think the Centre Backs and Midfielders were exposed by some truly awful positional and general play by Full Backs and Wingers.

If we play wingers, we need to stretch the opposition and get crosses in. We always seem to fail with this! Therefore, I agree with those that mention going back to a more "solid" 442 with Lowe at RB and then either Sido or Billy Left back. I dont think away he will play a diamond so would not be surprised to see a narrower midfield with maybe Terry in behind Gillespie or the three baldies in partnership! (I think we have the team to play 5 at the back but you just never seem to see it these days!!)

[Chelt Luke in Glos]

I agree RCS thats the team i would play unless gornell is back

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

I know you think I am thick and you are entitled your opinion
The thread is entitled 3 up top
So where in your original post do you suggest a 4-4-2 formation?
One further question , why do you always have to try and have the last word on every thread on here

Jesus man.

Nowhere in this thread did I say 4-4-2! That is the point you have got confused on. Let me explain in three steps:

1. This thread was suggesting 4-3-3.

2, CHIORBOY then said:

"This is not a dig at RCS but I think it is interesting that many fans were calling for 442 for a lot of last season and now many are already now calling for change."

3. To which I responded by holding my hands up to say that I was one of those people who (LAST SEASON not this thread) called for 4-4-2, however due to circumstance I had indeed called for a change for the next game and suggested 4-3-3.

Nothing more to it than that!

Q. "One further question , why do you always have to try and have the last word on every thread on here"

A. I do not. Plenty of topics still active where I am not doing that. End the obsession.

[leohoenig]

Nothing more to it than that!

Q. "One further question , why do you always have to try and have the last word on every thread on here"

A. I do not. Plenty of topics still active where I am not doing that. End the obsession.

Does that mean you will not reply to this post???

P.S. I do not agree with the original suggestion. If Gornell is fit, then I expect we will try 4-4-1-1 with Gillespie behind Gornell, not the other way around (as mentioned somewhere, I cannot remember where). This is for the obvious reason that Gornell looked good at holding up the ball and distributing, in the game I saw him play.

[tunnelvision]

... lets go three up front, but built on a solid back four and midfield three who take no nonsense.

--------------Brown----------------

Keith-----Troy----Stevo----Jones

---Penn-----Taylor----Richards---

--Harrison---Stevie G---Vincent--

I was thinking almost exactly the same, although I might have stuck with CBB, to avoid disrupting the defence too much.

[RTT]

I wish we had a better right back

[Dave Beesley]

It seems so frustrating that Yates can't see some of his players best roles.
Deering is not a winger, but he can be very threatening in behind the striker.
McGlashan is a right winger, I'm not a fan of him on the left.
Byron, despite his height, strikes me as a poacher. So why is he having the ball hoofed at his head for 90 mins.

I would line up 4-5-1 based on the injuries/fitness issues. I also wouldn't axe players from the team for 1 bad game.

Brown

Jombati
Elliot
Brown
CBB

McGlashan
Penn
Richards
Vincent

Deering

Gillespie

And bring Byron on at 60/70 mins to rest Gillespie.

[kags]

Agree with the above, hopefully Gornell is fit and can come in for Deering.

[JVG]

It seems so frustrating that Yates can't see some of his players best roles.
Deering is not a winger, but he can be very threatening in behind the striker.
McGlashan is a right winger, I'm not a fan of him on the left.
Byron, despite his height, strikes me as a poacher. So why is he having the ball hoofed at his head for 90 mins.

I would line up 4-5-1 based on the injuries/fitness issues. I also wouldn't axe players from the team for 1 bad game.

Brown

Jombati
Elliot
Brown
CBB

McGlashan
Penn
Richards
Vincent

Deering

Gillespie

And bring Byron on at 60/70 mins to rest Gillespie.

This is the starting 11 we should have for Saturday if Gornell not fit. Accrington are terrible (even though we don't travel well up north) so I can't see the benefit of playing 4-5-1 and no matter if we try and play 4-3-3 it'll end up being 4-5-1.

[RED ROB]

Both left and right backs aren't good enough and lightweight.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

Both left and right backs aren't good enough and lightweight.

Odd that the main criticisms of our wide men over the years, whether McG, Mo, J-Low, Vincent mk.1, JJ, Devaney etc and the reason they get abused by some in the crowd is for not being strong or solid enough in the challenge, when primarily their role is to bomb on and attack.

Conversely, the same critics seems to prefer a left-back who can bomb on and attack over one who is solid and strong, when their primary role is defend!

How many times has McG been done by a stern challenge or bullied by a tough man, and I'm sure if you look at his best games they have been against light-weight full-backs.

That's why I suggested Lowe and Jones return to get some studs and boot through the opposition and the ball, though I do appreciate the alternative view, which ultimately is why we have four players for two positions, to give us the luxury of changing as required.

[RED ROB]

I would go along with that RCS.