ThatNightInFlorence 696 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Watching yesterday's game back and seeing how wasteful Waghorn was when playing through the centre got me thinking that maybe playing Holt as a false number 9 would be good for us.Waghorn to me looks far more effective when he plays out wide and Holt has proven he has an eye for goal. It would also allow us to get Law back in the side in the midfield. Anyone agree/disagree? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie0202 12,220 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Disagree. Has an eye for goal but his attacking play is all about making late runs from midfield in to the box. He can't really do that when leading the line. We need a striker in January. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottyscott1963 18,223 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Disagree. Has an eye for goal but his attacking play is all about making late runs from midfield in to the box. He can't really do that when leading the line. We need a striker in January. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wully 47,210 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I thought this thread was started because we never had a Holt thread this week. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyson1872 2,923 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I would send waghorn over to the right and try Shiels as the false 9. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie0202 12,220 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I would send waghorn over to the right and try Shiels as the false 9.This post highlights how badly we need a new striker. The fact that we're discussing shoehorning as many different players as we can in to the role speaks volumes. The other day there was a thread started on Halliday playing up front. Now we have Holt and Shiels being suggested.Like I said before, new striker in January required. Getting the right man for the right price may be a different story though sadly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyson1872 2,923 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 This post highlights how badly we need a new striker. The fact that we're discussing shoehorning as many different players as we can in to the role speaks volumes. The other day there was a thread started on Halliday playing up front. Now we have Holt and Shiels being suggested.Like I said before, new striker in January required. Getting the right man for the right price may be a different story though sadly.Shiels has played striker a lot throughout his career though, he has the attributes of a false nine Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie0202 12,220 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Shiels has played striker a lot throughout his career though, he has the attributes of a false nineI never said you wrote something wrong mate. My point was that if Waghorn or another player was convincing up top then we wouldn't need to have this discussion and says a lot about our current striking options.For the record though I wouldn't have Shiels there either. Another who isn't prolific enough. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's blue he's white 717 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Disagree, how about playing our best player in his most natural and comfortable position...which is attacking midfield Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piperpete 3,186 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 We need to get Tav making runs into the box which opens up space for the forwards and midfield to goal, Tav never made one run into the box that I can remember over the last few weeks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyson1872 2,923 Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I never said you wrote something wrong mate. My point was that if Waghorn or another player was convincing up top then we wouldn't need to have this discussion and says a lot about our current striking options.For the record though I wouldn't have Shiels there either. Another who isn't prolific enough.I get you now. His record for us isn't too bad and false nines generally assist more than they score, but then our wingers aren't prolific enough in front of goal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.