collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Recent Topics

Champions League Contention by ez
[Today at 06:02:42 PM]


Calum Chambers -signed by Gareth
[Today at 06:02:10 PM]


Joe Gauci - Signed by Drummond
[Today at 05:59:10 PM]


Youri Tielemans (confirmed) by Drummond
[Today at 05:49:46 PM]


Aston Villa 2 Chelsea 2 Post Match Heart Massage. by paul_e
[Today at 05:48:23 PM]


Season Tickets - 2023/24 by Nii Lamptey
[Today at 05:48:08 PM]


FFP by paul_e
[Today at 05:46:12 PM]


Summer 2024 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc. by Footy-Vill
[Today at 05:42:02 PM]

Recent Posts

Re: Champions League Contention by ez
[Today at 06:02:42 PM]


Re: Calum Chambers -signed by Gareth
[Today at 06:02:10 PM]


Re: Joe Gauci - Signed by Drummond
[Today at 05:59:10 PM]


Re: Champions League Contention by Drummond
[Today at 05:58:09 PM]


Re: Calum Chambers -signed by Risso
[Today at 05:56:34 PM]


Re: Calum Chambers -signed by Footy-Vill
[Today at 05:53:48 PM]


Re: Calum Chambers -signed by Footy-Vill
[Today at 05:52:03 PM]


Re: Youri Tielemans (confirmed) by Drummond
[Today at 05:49:46 PM]

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Why no Heskey ?  (Read 17303 times)

Offline Phil from the upper holte

  • Member
  • Posts: 10142
  • Location: B62
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #45 on: March 20, 2011, 07:17:09 PM »
He wont go 442 and if he did i would rather bent and gabby than heskey- houllier will not change the formation thats for sure, having worked at it all season.

The problem is lack of passion, spirit,and inspiration- the players can create chances but the defending has been shocking all season and ash should be out wide , not in the hole.

 
What formation do you think he is playing?


A shit one

Offline eastie

  • Member
  • Posts: 19940
  • Age: 58
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #46 on: March 20, 2011, 07:19:24 PM »
                  Friedal

Walker.       Herd.    Cuellar.       Baker


              Reo- coker.     Makoun

                 
   Downing.       Ash.           Albrighton


                     Bent


A kind of 4231 formation with ash roving.

Offline hawkeye

  • Member
  • Posts: 8973
  • GM : Jun, 2012
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #47 on: March 20, 2011, 07:27:29 PM »
its not though, we are playing 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1. It isnt working and it isnt the formation you descrie above

Offline TimTheVillain

  • Member
  • Posts: 4447
  • Location: Location
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #48 on: March 20, 2011, 07:30:10 PM »
Jeez, why even bother to discuss formations ?

The answers simple enough - he's shyte !

Offline spangley1812

  • Member
  • Posts: 6495
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #49 on: March 20, 2011, 07:34:50 PM »
its not though, we are playing 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1. It isnt working and it isnt the formation you descrie above

its not 4 4 2 in a million zillion years...........

Offline ozzjim

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 29986
  • Location: Here.
  • GM : 30.08.2022
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #50 on: March 20, 2011, 07:37:32 PM »
Think due to it being Clark's 10th booking he gets 2 games. In fact I am sure of it.

Offline TheSandman

  • Member
  • Posts: 34781
  • Age: 33
  • Location: The seaside town that they forgot to bomb
  • GM : May, 2013
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #51 on: March 20, 2011, 07:40:09 PM »
its not though, we are playing 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1. It isnt working and it isnt the formation you descrie above

its not 4 4 2 in a million zillion years...........

neither is it any sensical version of 4-5-1. i'd say it was nearer 4-4-2.

Offline spangley1812

  • Member
  • Posts: 6495
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #52 on: March 20, 2011, 07:43:47 PM »
its not though, we are playing 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1. It isnt working and it isnt the formation you descrie above

its not 4 4 2 in a million zillion years...........

neither is it any sensical version of 4-5-1. i'd say it was nearer 4-4-2.

If its 4 4 2 who is supposed to playing along side Bent..........

Offline TheSandman

  • Member
  • Posts: 34781
  • Age: 33
  • Location: The seaside town that they forgot to bomb
  • GM : May, 2013
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #53 on: March 20, 2011, 07:47:51 PM »
its not though, we are playing 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1. It isnt working and it isnt the formation you descrie above

its not 4 4 2 in a million zillion years...........

neither is it any sensical version of 4-5-1. i'd say it was nearer 4-4-2.

If its 4 4 2 who is supposed to playing along side Bent..........

Young as a so called second striker. 4-5-1 would suggest a player a midfield three. It is really neither one thing or the other. It lacks the strengths of either formation but holds the weaknesses of both .

Offline hawkeye

  • Member
  • Posts: 8973
  • GM : Jun, 2012
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #54 on: March 20, 2011, 07:49:33 PM »
as i said you might say its 4-4-1-1 Young is playing just behind Bent, like MON got Heskey to play just behind Gabby, If we were playing 4-2-3-1 then the strting positions of the two wingers would be higher up the pitch and usually a lot closer Young.

Offline hawkeye

  • Member
  • Posts: 8973
  • GM : Jun, 2012
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #55 on: March 20, 2011, 07:54:12 PM »
Thanks Sand-Bent man , that is what I am trying to get over. We still leave massive gaps in the middle.
and our midfield 2 are often out numbered because we are often 3 v 2 against teams who play 4-5-1 or 4-3-3. We are playing a daft system so ash can play in his favourite position.

Offline TonyD

  • Member
  • Posts: 9577
  • Location: Outside the box
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #56 on: March 20, 2011, 08:03:44 PM »
You know its bad and all sanity has gone when people suggest that arguably the biggest piss poor excuse for a footballer ever to wear our colours is going to help us out of this mess.

Offline Chipsticks

  • Member
  • Posts: 7207
  • GM : 22.04.2015
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #57 on: March 20, 2011, 08:14:50 PM »
You know its bad and all sanity has gone when people suggest that arguably the biggest piss poor excuse for a footballer ever to wear our colours is going to help us out of this mess.

Right, less of that NOW. I couldn't give a flying fuck about player's reputations at this point - in fact, that's probably the main problem with those group of players: obsession with their reputation.

We are going down unless we change shit around now, Heskey and Bent might make a great partnership, and anything's worth a shot. Just get off Heskey's fucking back for once.

Offline Cuz

  • Member
  • Posts: 377
  • Location: Cheltenham
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #58 on: March 20, 2011, 08:16:40 PM »
Don't worry Houlier and GMac are discussing playing him as a creative midfielder or Keeper l
You know its bad and all sanity has gone when people suggest that arguably the biggest piss poor excuse for a footballer ever to wear our colours is going to help us out of this mess.

Offline Fergal

  • Member
  • Posts: 20960
  • Location: worksop
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: Why no Heskey ?
« Reply #59 on: March 20, 2011, 08:18:49 PM »
I don't think it matters what formation we play. GH has lost the dressing room and needs to go and go now.  K Mac will at least get the players playing for the club.
As sad as that is it's the best solution I can come up with.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal