GreasyChipBeattie
Well-Known Member
I think Lundstram is a decent player and deserves a chance to develop.
He looks comfortable on the ball and will continue to improve his effectiveness with 1st team game time.
My point is though, that whoever came in would need time to get the mid three working together as before.
Our previous midfield 3 developed and honed an understanding through playing together for the best part of a season and a half and knew each other's game in a way that can only develop over time.
I'd go as far as to say, if we'd have disrupted our midfield by losing either Duffy or Fleck, we would still have had a major change to deal with regardless of who would have replaced them.
When we are at our best, Coutts, Fleck and Duffy all have great games.
I wouldn't screw up the game plan just yet.
Maybe mix it up a bit more from time to time if certain teams do seem to have have sussed us out, but a back 3 has served us well before and I don't see why it won't serve us well again.
He looks comfortable on the ball and will continue to improve his effectiveness with 1st team game time.
My point is though, that whoever came in would need time to get the mid three working together as before.
Our previous midfield 3 developed and honed an understanding through playing together for the best part of a season and a half and knew each other's game in a way that can only develop over time.
I'd go as far as to say, if we'd have disrupted our midfield by losing either Duffy or Fleck, we would still have had a major change to deal with regardless of who would have replaced them.
When we are at our best, Coutts, Fleck and Duffy all have great games.
I wouldn't screw up the game plan just yet.
Maybe mix it up a bit more from time to time if certain teams do seem to have have sussed us out, but a back 3 has served us well before and I don't see why it won't serve us well again.
