Ebbsfleet

[sjk2008]

Does Micky stick with 352 or is this now the time to change it up? With Hogan suspended again, McGahey being shite, and with the players we’ve brought in, I feel now is the perfect time to switch to a back 4.

 

Id go…

 

Hudson

 

Sachdev - Hobson - Raglan - Kitching

 

Lundstram - Conlon - Sheron

 

Walker - Norwood - Dallas

Subs

Norman

Sutton

Hammond

Fondop

Garner

 

If we can bring in someone like Cian Hayes or a ball playing, tough tackling midfielder to replace Sheron, I think it would transform us.

 

None the less, I fancy the good away form to continue here. 
 

1-3 (Norwood, Dallas, Sheron)

[Boyyou]

Suspect it's 3-5-2 again but, at some stage, wouldn't mind a 4-2-3-1

Hudson

Sachdev Hobson Raglan Kitching

Sheron Conlon

Walker Norwood Dallas

Garner

[BP1960]

1 hour ago, Boyyou said:

Suspect it's 3-5-2 again but, at some stage, wouldn't mind a 4-2-3-1

Hudson

Sachdev Hobson Raglan Kitching

Sheron Conlon

Walker Norwood Dallas

Garner

 

Would MM risk Hammond for Sheron I wonder?

[BP1960]

When we see the team sheet and its an unchanged team.

[oafc1955]

It’s a gamble to play all the new lads tbh as it equates to half a team. It’s a bit like preseason when players are getting to know each other.

2 or 3 haven’t played too much of late either so we’re probably going to have to show a little patience while they get up to speed. 

[Lukers1]

I’d possible I’d give Josh a break, his form so far is pretty poor. Keep him on the bench

[LaticsEddie]

I dont think Dallas is fit enough to start just yet so I reckon a 352, unchanged from Saturday or Garner for Fondop. I think we might switch to 433 at some point too with Walker and Dallas coming on.

[yarddog73]

49 minutes ago, LaticsEddie said:

I dont think Dallas is fit enough to start just yet so I reckon a 352, unchanged from Saturday or Garner for Fondop. I think we might switch to 433 at some point too with Walker and Dallas coming on.

Who on earth would go unchanged from Saturday?, McGahey shouldn't be anywhere near our starting eleven, add to that he was piss poor in the reverse fixture when we were battered 4-1 at BP as Ebbsfleet ran rings round him.

[Dave_Og]

Is Hogan still suspended?

[mcfluff1985]

Just now, Dave_Og said:

Is Hogan still suspended?

Think so, yeah. 2 games suspension

[the_mighty_bosh]

15 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

Who on earth would go unchanged from Saturday?, McGahey shouldn't be anywhere near our starting eleven, add to that he was piss poor in the reverse fixture when we were battered 4-1 at BP as Ebbsfleet ran rings round him.

 

As it's worked for recent away games I'd keep with the 3-5-2 to start with, but I agree that I wouldn't start McGahey.  Sutton as a like-for-like change would be it for me.

[the_mighty_bosh]

2 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

Is Hogan still suspended?

 

Just for this game.

[LaticsEddie]

1 hour ago, yarddog73 said:

Who on earth would go unchanged from Saturday?, McGahey shouldn't be anywhere near our starting eleven, add to that he was piss poor in the reverse fixture when we were battered 4-1 at BP as Ebbsfleet ran rings round him.

Who else are you putting there? Who else are you going to put in the midfield? But for suspension, thats the strongest side we have

[yarddog73]

1 hour ago, LaticsEddie said:

Who else are you putting there? Who else are you going to put in the midfield? But for suspension, thats the strongest side we have

So who does Garner and Dallas come in for then? McGahey isn't in our strongest eleven, he doesn't even make my 16. I'd rather play Sheron on the left of a back three if that's the way we are going to set up.

 

Sooner we can go with a 4-3-3 the better for me. Personally I'd go;

 

Hudson

 

Sutton

Hobson

Raglan

Kitching 

 

Gardner

Conlon 

Lundstrum 

 

Garner

Norwood 

Dallas

 

Norman

Sheron

Green

Walker

Fondop

 

 

As a front 6 that gives us half a chance of imposing ourselves on teams.

[deyres42]

Aren't Dallas and Garner strikers rather than wide forwards?

[yarddog73]

4 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

Aren't Dallas and Garner strikers rather than wide forwards?

Yes probably although although all three could probably play in behind a two.

[LaticsEddie]

2 hours ago, yarddog73 said:

So who does Garner and Dallas come in for then? McGahey isn't in our strongest eleven, he doesn't even make my 16. I'd rather play Sheron on the left of a back three if that's the way we are going to set up.

 

Sooner we can go with a 4-3-3 the better for me. Personally I'd go;

 

Hudson

 

Sutton

Hobson

Raglan

Kitching 

 

Gardner

Conlon 

Lundstrum 

 

Garner

Norwood 

Dallas

 

Norman

Sheron

Green

Walker

Fondop

 

 

As a front 6 that gives us half a chance of imposing ourselves on teams.

I think 4-3-3 will come but Dallas isnt match fit yet, and integral to it. Barely played for Killie and only a 30 min run out on Saturday. I dont know where Garner fits in tbh, I think he's a replacement for Fondop in that he is someone you can lump it up to but with a lot more footy smarts.

 

Out of the CB options we have, McGahey is unfortunately the best option for LCB. Id like Sutton to have a run out but I dont think id trust him on the left side. That must be one of the targets for summer, a left footed CB.

[Boyyou]

33 minutes ago, LaticsEddie said:

I think 4-3-3 will come but Dallas isnt match fit yet, and integral to it. Barely played for Killie and only a 30 min run out on Saturday. I dont know where Garner fits in tbh, I think he's a replacement for Fondop in that he is someone you can lump it up to but with a lot more footy smarts.

 

Out of the CB options we have, McGahey is unfortunately the best option for LCB. Id like Sutton to have a run out but I dont think id trust him on the left side. That must be one of the targets for summer, a left footed CB.

Been banging on about a left-footed CB all season. It does offer better balance and it's a bonus squad wise if said CB can fill in at LB if required.

[LaticsEddie]

12 minutes ago, Boyyou said:

Been banging on about a left-footed CB all season. It does offer better balance and it's a bonus squad wise if said CB can fill in at LB if required.

Luckily there's some decent ones for this level and league 2 who will be available on a free come June. Turnbull at Tranmere, Frazer Blake-Tracy at Swindon, James Husband at Blackpool to name a few

[LightDN123]

I just don’t see this shift to a 433 and confused how Dallas and Walker fit in to be honest. 
 

The team seems even more like a scatter gun approach to me at this point. 
 

How do we fit in, Norwood, Garner, Dallas, Fondop, Walker, Green, Reid.

 

Then we have Kurt, Tollitt, Nuttall, Shelton, Ward, Dickinson. All surplus to requirements. 

[daniel]

3 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

I just don’t see this shift to a 433 and confused how Dallas and Walker fit in to be honest. 
 

The team seems even more like a scatter gun approach to me at this point. 
 

How do we fit in, Norwood, Garner, Dallas, Fondop, Walker, Green, Reid.

 

Then we have Kurt, Tollitt, Nuttall, Shelton, Ward, Dickinson. All surplus to requirements. 

We don’t need to fit in Reid or Green but I get your points otherwise. I’d be surprised if both featured much at all for the rest of the season. 

[LightDN123]

29 minutes ago, daniel said:

We don’t need to fit in Reid or Green but I get your points otherwise. I’d be surprised if both featured much at all for the rest of the season. 

We need Reid to keep Kitch happy. 

[disjointed]

14 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

We need Reid to keep Kitch happy. 

Are they a couple or co-habiting, if not I don't see the connection. 

[rudemedic]

Just now, disjointed said:

Are they a couple or co-habiting, if not I don't see the connection. 

Co-habiting, I'm not sure if one is the other's landlord or what but they live in the same flat.

[disjointed]

19 minutes ago, rudemedic said:

Co-habiting, I'm not sure if one is the other's landlord or what but they live in the same flat.

Cheers doc, if Kitch just needs someone to do his cooking, I will drive Reid to whichever team wants him and batch cook some meals.