Shrimpsvoices

I say go for it, this is make or break, win and it could bring new found confidence into both the players and the fans. I say go 3-5-2.

IMO we need to make the most of Laurence Wilson who is wasted at left back so I would go for..


Roche
Charnock Bentley Parrish
Duffy Stanley Fleming Brown Wilson
Jevons Spencer

I would like to see more of Hendrie aswell.

Agreed, we need the points big time in this game and should go for it big time against a very poor team, a draw is no use at all.

And Hereford haven't won at home even yet.

Let's go for it. BIG style !!!

3-1 to The Shrimps !!!

Sammy h wrote:I say go for it, this is make or break, win and it could bring new found confidence into both the players and the fans. I say go 3-5-2.

IMO we need to make the most of Laurence Wilson who is wasted at left back so I would go for..


Roche
Charnock Bentley Parrish
Duffy Stanley Fleming Brown Wilson
Jevons Spencer

I would like to see more of Hendrie aswell.

looks ok but if Drummond is fit which sounds likely then I would play him instead of Brown. He is a real threat at corners and his creativity has been missed.

I say go for it, this is make or break, win and it could bring new found confidence into both the players and the fans. I say go 3-5-2


Yes defo 3-5-2

4-0 to mfc..........

Sammy h wrote:I say go for it, this is make or break, win and it could bring new found confidence into both the players and the fans. I say go 3-5-2.

IMO we need to make the most of Laurence Wilson who is wasted at left back so I would go for..


Roche
Charnock Bentley Parrish
Duffy Stanley Fleming Brown Wilson
Jevons Spencer

I would like to see more of Hendrie aswell.

although i was quiet critical with this formation a few seasons ago, i have been thinking for a while that this formation may be the anser and give us more balance seeing we have a wealth on center-backs and its tailor made to suit Wilson

but your team Sammy H my only query would be Duffy at wing-back with his defensive duties id have Brown in there instead he as a good engine to get up & down and is built quiet stocky to get stuck in

Roche
Parrish Bentley Charnock
Brown Duffy Stanley Drummond Wilson
Jevons Spencer

Team for Saturday continued... I still say stick with the same line up

DawZi wrote:but your team Sammy H my only query would be Duffy at wing-back with his defensive duties id have Brown in there instead he as a good engine to get up & down and is built quiet stocky to get stuck in

Roche
Parrish Bentley Charnock
Brown Duffy Stanley Drummond Wilson
Jevons Spencer

I agree with your comment and 10/11 of selection but I'd look at Mullin (if fit) for Spencer.

______________Roche__________________
______Parrish Bentley Charnock________
Brown Duffy Stanley Drummond Wilson
__________Jevons Mullin_______________

I'd say 3 5 2
roche
mccready charnock parrish
hunter Stanley brown Fleming Wilson
jevons spencer

we shall see....

Roche
Parrish Bently Charnock

Duffy Fleming Drummond Stanley Wilson

Mullin Jevons
If fit this is the team to beat Port Vale.

Interesting how most people are now going for 3-5-2. Hope Sammy goes for it instead of 4-4-2.

3-5-2. Think we might have to go down that route.

roche
parrish mccready charnock

drummond
hunter flemming brown capaldi

shuker
jevons

kennoshrimp wrote:roche
parrish mccready charnock

drummond
hunter flemming brown capaldi

shuker
jevons

That had no chance. Stanners, Duffy and your mate Willow won't all be missing.

Well.. Sammy obviously reads the forum

Sammy h wrote:Well.. Sammy obviously reads the forum

oh hell aye

system aside, keef was nearest with 2 wrong, next games starting line up will be

mrpotatohead wrote:system aside, keef was nearest with 2 wrong, next games starting line up will be

id keep it the same apart from id be tempted to play either Brown or Wainwright at right-wing-back although Hunter played well today it's his recovery pace in that position what i have doubts about

and maybe introduce Duffy in the middle three in midfield

Same without Drummond, don't know who to put in there though.