Stuart_RFC 41 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Burke, Naisy and Buffel in the same team up in Inverness, not a chance. I'm expecting to see either Naisy or Burke dropped and Adam keeping his place with McCulloch brought back in. Back to the hammer thorwing p*sh. Unfortunatly...you will be right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poetry_In_Blue 1,043 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Burke, Naisy and Buffel in the same team up in Inverness, not a chance. I'm expecting to see either Naisy or Burke dropped and Adam keeping his place with McCulloch brought back in. Back to the hammer thorwing p*sh. You're probably right, even though I'm hoping it is Adam that is dropped for McCulloch, but if WS can take of Naismith instead of Adam then I don't hold out much hope! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlippinEck 3,708 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I would seriously consider furman or emslie for the job in that left-ish midfield role of the 4-3-3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted January 18, 2008 Author Share Posted January 18, 2008 Lets hope he surprises us. I just hope that Adam is OUT. BTW LM may not be fit to play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy 68 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Burke, Naisy and Buffel in the same team up in Inverness, not a chance. I'm expecting to see either Naisy or Burke dropped and Adam keeping his place with McCulloch brought back in. Back to the hammer thorwing p*sh. I'd be tempted to bring McCulloch back into the middle of the park. McGregor Whittaker Cuellar Weir Papac Ferguson Hemdani McCulloch Burke Cousin Naismith McCulloch could offer us that bit of steel in the middle of the park, which is missing in the absence of Thomson. I know some will say that its not his natural position, but if you watch him when he starts on the left, he constantly drifts inside. I reckon he could fill the gap for now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muff 245 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Or resort to a 4-4-2 with McCulloch and Naisy. One on the left and one up top with Cousin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boab 73 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Well, this thread has grown legs since I left the house at a quarter past 5! Nevertheless, I agree with the below. The simple answer to the question is; if we want to play football and control the game while setting up goal chances, NO! Adam is sometimes good at free kicks but offers little defensively or in linking to the attack. McCulloch is an outlet in the air but offers little else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaD CoW 3 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I'd rather have McCulloch than Adam. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted January 18, 2008 Author Share Posted January 18, 2008 I'd rather have McCulloch than Adam. So would I, but liked it fine there when NEITHER was in the team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby 41 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 i prefer neither to start. hendami thommo baz burkey stevie looked the part so far Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted January 18, 2008 Author Share Posted January 18, 2008 Burke, Naisy and Buffel in the same team up in Inverness, not a chance. I'm expecting to see either Naisy or Burke dropped and Adam keeping his place with McCulloch brought back in. Back to the hammer thorwing p*sh. I'd be tempted to bring McCulloch back into the middle of the park. McGregor Whittaker Cuellar Weir Papac Ferguson Hemdani McCulloch Burke Cousin Naismith McCulloch could offer us that bit of steel in the middle of the park, which is missing in the absence of Thomson. I know some will say that its not his natural position, but if you watch him when he starts on the left, he constantly drifts inside. I reckon he could fill the gap for now. Better him than Adam, but he was off ill today so may not travel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diesel0412 1 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 if naisy or burke are dropped and adam keeps his place a will be pure rageing an al let adam know it anaw,he shud never play fur us again hes no where near good enough to be in the starting 11 or the subs bench imo.he was pure mince against gretna,a wid rather play faye :harhar: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulboy 2,518 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I'm afraid neither should start as we have looked a far better team without them. Lee is a striker and so should only be played there if we want the best out of him. Charlie is a really frustrating player, he can spot things others can't or won't try but doesn't do it often enough and couldn't tackle a fish supper Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted January 19, 2008 Author Share Posted January 19, 2008 I'm afraid neither should start as we have looked a far better team without them. Lee is a striker and so should only be played there if we want the best out of him. Charlie is a really frustrating player, he can spot things others can't or won't try but doesn't do it often enough and couldn't tackle a fish supper Agreed, both are limited. Both bring something to the team, but at a cost of pace, mobility, lost possession and moves breaking down. Lee is great for heading and also laying off balls and CA can have a wonder free kick once in a blue moon, but thats it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts