Team v Barnsley

[Ricky]

Must win. Let's go for it.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moore

- - - - - - - Basham - Wright - O'Connell

Baldock - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stevens

- - - - - - - - - - Evans - - - - - - Fleck

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brooks

- - - - - - - - - - -Sharp - - - - - Clarke


Subs: Eastwood, Lafferty, Leonard, Lundstram, Holmes, Donaldson, Wilson

 

[wizadry]

Is Stearman definitely out injured, Ricky?

 

[Ricky]

Is Stearman definitely out injured, Ricky?

I'd assume so. Might be done for the season if it was his hamstring.

Maybe Duffy will be back but it's unlikely he'd go back into the starting 11.

 

[Groucho Blade]

Brooks isn’t really ready to be a number 10 right now imho. He’s much more effective further forward.

You’d almost be playing 3-4-3 with that line up...which might work, but the balance of the team might be affected. Personally I’d stick with the same eleven that started on Monday.

 

[FMBlade1]

Would have Brooks alongside Clarke with Lundstram in for Sharp to tighten up the midfield which worked so well the other night.

If its not working can always change it around. We need to win, though a draw isn't fatal a loss certainly is so wary of going too gung-ho early on

 

[wizadry]

I'd assume so. Might be done for the season if it was his hamstring.

Maybe Duffy will be back but it's unlikely he'd go back into the starting 11.

I do like the look of your team though, I think it would give them a reyt good hiding.

 

[SteveBlade]

Same as Monday with JW if necessary.

 

[snootyfenooty]

Barnsley are shit. Whatever combination we put out we should hammer them. Game over for the season if we don't I'm afraid.

 

[thehet]

Same as Monday with JW if necessary.

This. We played well, stick with it.

 

[Houso]

Chucking in more attacking players will not necessarily make us more attacking.

We were excellent the other night going forward and injuries aside, there's absolutely no need to change anything.

 

[super_pig]

brooks and clarke seem to play well together. i'd start brooks.. jake in for Stears if he's out..

 

[sheffielder]

Brooks up top or not at all

 

[Champagneblade]

Moore

Leonard Basham O’Connell

Baldock Lundstram Evans Fleck Stevens

Brooks Clarke

Sharp standing by if Brooks can’t start.

Makes our defence quick whereas with Wright there is a potential lack of pace.

 

[JohnDenver]

Chucking in more attacking players will not necessarily make us more attacking.

We were excellent the other night going forward and injuries aside, there's absolutely no need to change anything.

As evidenced by Forest taking charge against us when we sent on the cavalry.

 

[Davalon]

Not keen on Baldock and Stevens both on the right. Think we look a bit exposed down the left.

 

[Bladezz]

Lundstram has to start no question about it. Best player on the pitch against Cardiff.

 

[FinchleyBlade]

Same team no need to change anything.

Brooks is also definitely a striker, not a Duffy no.10.

 

[PittsburghBlade]

Brooks isn’t really ready to be a number 10 right now imho. He’s much more effective further forward.

You’d almost be playing 3-4-3 with that line up...which might work, but the balance of the team might be affected. Personally I’d stick with the same eleven that started on Monday.

Same team no need to change anything.

Brooks is also definitely a striker, not a Duffy no.10.

Not to be rude, but what could either of you possibly of seen to suggest dropping off the back four into the 10 role and running at the defence isn't brooks' best attribute?

 

[PittsburghBlade]

Must win. Let's go for it.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moore

- - - - - - - Basham - Wright - O'Connell

Baldock - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stevens

- - - - - - - - - - Evans - - - - - - Fleck

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brooks

- - - - - - - - - - -Sharp - - - - - Clarke


Subs: Eastwood, Lafferty, Leonard, Lundstram, Holmes, Donaldson, Wilson

Agree with that team.

 

[CaptainMorgans]

Must win. Let's go for it.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moore

- - - - - - - Basham - Wright - O'Connell

Baldock - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stevens

- - - - - - - - - - Evans - - - - - - Fleck

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brooks

- - - - - - - - - - -Sharp - - - - - Clarke


Subs: Eastwood, Lafferty, Leonard, Lundstram, Holmes, Donaldson, Wilson

Same team, except I would drop Sharp, play Brooks with Clarke (we always look our best with those two up top) and play Duffy (Holmes if Duffy’s unavailable) in the hole.

Some will argue for Lundstram over Evans, but in my opinion neither of them are brilliant at this stage. I just prefer Evans due to his mobility. However, Evans’ inability to get a shot off cost us the win on Monday night. It perfectly encapsulated why we find ourselves outside of the top 6.

 

[Wards]

Yeah I’d agree with leaving Brooks up top, give him the freedom (and less defensive responsibility) to do whatever the fuck he wants to, dropping into pockets of space or going in behind. It frees up so much space for Clarke too.

 

[Ricky]

I agree Brooks is currently better in the second striker role rather than Duffy's role but this is a game where I think it'll work with him there, and I can see all three of him, Sharp and Clarke getting plenty of joy and wouldn't want to leave any of them out.

 

[Boxer Blade]

Would like to see Holmes be given his chance, looked our best player against wolves, looks like something is going to happen, bit like Brooks when he is on the ball, any chance both of them could start and let them have ago at a team lacking a bit of confidence, probably not, but all or nothing could prove a positive

 

[Ricky]

Brooks and Clarke with Holmes behind would be my second choice.

 

[s4-blade]

Lundstram simply HAS to play. Head and shoulders above Evans, but I’d play both of them in the same midfield three with Fleck until Duffy returns. Then drop Evans.

 

[Dnblade]

I wouldn't mind seeing an unchanged line up for Barnsley...Wright in for Stearman if he's out...That midfield 3 were really good v Cardiff,and Brooks drops off all the time to make an extra man in there,but is mobile enough to support and link up with Leon.
Brooks behind Sharp and Clarke ?..yeah,I'm not against that...Brooks needs a run of games now for me.

 

[Groucho Blade]

Not to be rude, but what could either of you possibly of seen to suggest dropping off the back four into the 10 role and running at the defence isn't brooks' best attribute?

The number 10 role involves a lot more than running at the defence though, doesn’t it? There’s knowing when to run, when to give a simple pass and when to try to lay off a killer pass. I don’t think Brooks has the experience or the guile just yet to make those decisions correctly. And he’d be expected to do his fair share of defensive duties as well. I don’t think he’s ready for that yet. One day soon mebbe...but not yet, not this season.

He’s much better up top causing havoc

 

[Ranmoorblade]

Must win. Let's go for it.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moore

- - - - - - - Basham - Wright - O'Connell

Baldock - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stevens

- - - - - - - - - - Evans - - - - - - Fleck

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brooks

- - - - - - - - - - -Sharp - - - - - Clarke


Subs: Eastwood, Lafferty, Leonard, Lundstram, Holmes, Donaldson, Wilson

So you would drop Lundstram who was the best player on the pitch on Monday? That isn't going to happen.

 

[Ricky]

So you would drop Lundstram who was the best player on the pitch on Monday? That isn't going to happen.

Unfortunately for the Lundstram enthusiasts Wilder's more likely to drop him than Evans.

He wasn't the best player on the pitch either, at least Basham and Fleck were better than him.

 

[Ranmoorblade]

Unfortunately for the Lundstram enthusiasts Wilder's more likely to drop him than Evans.

He wasn't the best player on the pitch either, at least Basham and Fleck were better than him.