Roy's View From... Pre-Match View From Brentford

[zablade]

Nobody on our site thinks this .

It was stated that Egan suits our “style” more than Brentford’s . The implication being that Brentford play out from the back so need a “footballer” in there whereas... well fill in the blanks.

We play out from the back when ever we can only we are slightly more pragmatic in not taking silly risks against a high press.

If Egan couldn’t play he wouldn’t be thriving in this formation.

 

[Les]

It was stated that Egan suits our “style” more than Brentford’s . The implication being that Brentford play out from the back so need a “footballer” in there whereas... well fill in the blanks.

We play out from the back when ever we can only we are slightly more pragmatic in not taking silly risks against a high press.

If Egan couldn’t play he wouldn’t be thriving in this formation.

If you played two centre backs and always played out from the back, how comfortable would you be playing John Egan in that role?

This was Smith's style for us.

 

[Bristol Blade]

Reyt cart horse is Egan...

 

[zablade]

If you played two centre backs and always played out from the back, how comfortable would you be playing John Egan in that role?

This was Smith's style for us.

From what I have seen of him I’d be pretty comfortable of him in a back two or back three.

Whatever players I wouldn’t be comfortable “always” playing out from the back.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

On this forum several have said he still wouldn’t be a guaranteed starter, personally I’d have both of them straight into the staring 11 - you?

No player should have a guaranteed start, but Brooks was clearly in Wilder's plans, was being brought more and more into the first team and was only held back by his illness. I would have expected him to have cemented a first team place if he hadn't have buggered off.
However, I don't remember there being anyone claiming he wouldn't start in our first team.

 

[itsinyerblood]

No player should have a guaranteed start, but Brooks was clearly in Wilder's plans, was being brought more and more into the first team and was only held back by his illness. I would have expected him to have cemented a first team place if he hadn't have buggered off.e he l
However, I don't remember there being anyone claiming he wouldn't start in our first team.

That's about the long and short of it. There was Brooks' glandular fever too, so it's meant to knock the stuffing out of a victim, plus, if I recall, didn't Brooks go awol for a little while? I recall Wilder smiling sarcastically once he laid eyes on a tweet that Brooks sent that informed the world which Blades were injured at the time, with Wilder adding a curt but humorous warning to Brooks once he returned.

There had already been a concise quip from Wilder mentioning the new agent that Brooks had signed to, as if the writing was on the wall, so it was as if fate had taken control, and even if we'd done our very best, Brooks would still have left the Blades. What many posters seem to have forgotten is that there was only one offer on the table, so the valuation wasn't something we could do much about. Bottom line, the fee for Brooks enabled us to strengthen the tee.am and there's only been progress since.

 

[OO 21]

Last 6 in league, they conceded against Derby and lost to Barnet in the cup.
…and look at the last 6 opposition…
Blackburn (3-0 All 3 scored when 10v10)
QPR (1-0)
Bolton (2-0)
Middlesbrough (1-0 Mid 10 men for last 25min)
Reading (4-0)
Rotherham (2-0 Rot with 10 men for last hour)
Its a tall order but not as bad as their headline home form would suggest.”


SAYIN' NOW BITCH?????

 

[Rusty view]

Nailed on defeat


It worked again!







(we go again, undefeated since I started this vastly immature comment)