Omar Don't Scare Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Actually the "correct" terminology definitely doesn't reference Munich at all. You don't call Liverpool Hillsborough do you? No I've a tendency to call them JFT39 or Heysels though but I've think you're getting a touch carried away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Don't Scare Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Quite. I thought his was all about creating an atmosphere without offending people. Well I'm offended by references to Munich. I'll still be using them Dave, each to their own Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Don't Scare Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Without the risk of going off track can we stick to creating these new songs or at least better copies. My ill judged, offensive or whatever they are opinions will remain regardless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Actually the "correct" terminology definitely doesn't reference Munich at all. You don't call Liverpool Hillsborough do you? They might now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Until this I didnt realise that was a Man Yoo song. Sod that. Sing sumat else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Football songs need to be short and simple, like me. The tune also needs to be recognisable. That's why many clubs use the same tune and alter the words to suit. There's no such thing as a "United tune". :censored:'s sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Football songs need to be short and simple, like me. There's no such thing as a "United tune". :censored:'s sake. No, but subsituting a players name for lyrics they use is a "united song" - just not the tune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latics_Fanatic Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Take me home, Furtherwood Road... Relax, i'm kidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 No, but subsituting a players name for lyrics they use is a "united song" - just not the tune. I politely disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsChris Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Football songs need to be short and simple, like me. The tune also needs to be recognisable. That's why many clubs use the same tune and alter the words to suit. There's no such thing as a "United tune". :censored:'s sake. This. This, this, this, this and this again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeylandLatic Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 It's political correctness gone mad, Stew. These days you can't even mock a football club for having nearly all their players all die young at once. They make out that you're probably not a well-rounded character or something. And hardly anybody had a go at the lino at Doncaster for being female. They'll ban christmas next. In the old days, you could get your head and you could submerge it in a vat of boiling acid and now they're goin "oooh don't do that, what if Jews see it?". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceStationLatic Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Can we sing this song please It's clearly the best one Agree. The Winchester is wonderful the best one by a country mile at present Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 https://vine.co/v/OzuiiKPbehh As seen on Soccer AM. So I'm told. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 For goodness sake give Winchester a free role at home in central midfield, if Jones or Kelly has to be sacrificed so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) Excellent again today... during the first half. He seems to fade quite a bit in the second half for some reason...? It's happened during a few games now. Edited September 13, 2014 by blueatheart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Excellent again today... during the first half. He seems to fade quite a bit in the second half for some reason...? It's happened during a few games now. He ran out of gas today IMHO. Not surprising as he's played 5 full games in 2 weeks. That and because he was away on international duty he had less rest than I'd would think all their players. I would be surprised to see him play the whole game for both of our next 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) Excellent again today... during the first half. He seems to fade quite a bit in the second half for some reason...? It's happened during a few games now. He needs the ball at his feet, give it him constantly in central midfield and he will do the business, isolated out wide is not the place for him IMO. He's a player capable of excellent strikes at goal, but he won't do it from out wide. Edited September 13, 2014 by BP1960 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmer1 Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) But he isn't up to the nitty gritty of a central midfield fight for 90 mins. If you are top and can dominate then OK but he will dissapear against 2 physical central midfielder. Jones and Kelly are doing a very good job in the middle for us. Edited September 13, 2014 by palmer1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC0AFC Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 he got boxed out of the game scene half, because he was our main threat first half! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 But he isn't up to the nitty gritty of a central midfield fight for 90 mins. If you are top and can dominate then OK but he will dissapear against 2 physical central midfielder. Jones and Kelly are doing a very good job in the middle for us. That was in the past, he's physically up to it now, even when surrounded by much bigger players they can't get the ball off him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisbrogan Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Don't agree at all that he faded. Continued to carry a threat at set up the chance for Morgan-Smith, 3 minutes into injury time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmer1 Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) That was in the past, he's physically up to it now, even when surrounded by much bigger players they can't get the ball off him.Im not talking about when he has the ball I'm talking about when he doesnt.Winchester has improved physically but I don't think he could do the job Kelly and Jones have done for the last few games. I'm not taking anything away from his performance he has been excellent. 90 minutes in the centre winning the ball, chasing and harassing and then setting up play is very different to playing out wide. Edited September 13, 2014 by palmer1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC0AFC Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 4-3-3? he won't change what we're currently doing well with, but if you was to fit winchester in the middle it would have to be with jones and Kelly behind him doing the dirty work so Rachubka Wilson Wilson Elokobi Mills Jones Kelly Winchester Poleon Philliskirk Forte Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldhamoafc Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 He needs the ball at his feet, give it him constantly in central midfield and he will do the business, isolated out wide is not the place for him IMO. Do you mean like he's been while winning man of the matches and player of the months? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slystallone Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 Do you mean like he's been while winning man of the matches and player of the months? Exactly. I get what BP1960 is getting at - Winchester and Forte carry pretty much our main attacking threats; and are both the players to get the ball and drive it forward. So - naturally, you'd want to get them central in the hope that they can do that from a position more likely to carry a goal threat? But - whilst it's tempting to look to get Winchester central midfield and Forte CF, i think you'd actually loose their effectiveness by doing that, weakeni g their their threat instead of utilising it more? Winchester has been a revelation at RM. Not Right Wing, Right Midfield, and there is the key difference. He's not being asked to be Neil Adams mark II and hug the line, beat the LB and whip balls in. He's drifting, he's picking it up in pockets of space between lines and between areas where the opposition arent prepared or covered, and he's driving it forward from there. Switch him inside, into more heavily policed 'traffic' and i believe he'd be less effective instead of more. Philliskirk plays the drifting role - a sort of number 10 for the lower league - and when on form, as he's started to be again, he plays it well. He'd be the one to be dropped to accomodate Winchester playing centrally, as i dont believe you can include Carl in a CM with either of Kelly or Jones. He'd need both behind him IMO. At League One level, its so tempting to say 'release the shakels' and play an attacking midfielder as one of the 2 in CM. 'you dont need to holding midfielders' and the like. But IMO, you do. Both Kelly and Jones arent being played as holders. They are both just positionally aware that they need to cover, track and defend as well as try to commit forward. Wes & Korey were the same, so too Furman and Stephens if you want to go back further. If you look at other teams at this level - forget the Premiership level as thats a different beast - at this level, how many other sides go gun ho and play 1 CM paired with 1 ACM? If they do have a player like that - Adam Forshaw at Brentford last season or Tomlin at P'boro over the last few, they've played him ahead a midfield 2. We're playing that at the moment, and Philliskirk is in that role. He knows how to play it. Winchester hasnt played that role at L1 level yet, he'd be learing on the job during games; and would be switched from a position where he's doing really well playing out from. Leave him where he is. Keep him in the side, where he's been effective. Quote Link to comment 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.