|
|
| 80sglory |
| September 3, 2011, 2:07pm |
|
Guest User |
I think we're slightly cross purposes there, as you say it is impossible to have more than one squad base, what I'm saying is that when building a squad it should be able to cover all basic formations with the basic requirements of cover. Rather than say for example a manager who prefers 4-3-3 developing a squad on a 4-3-3 system, which would need more central midfield cover and less wing cover. This would be extremely limiting as in this example you would need up to six midfielders to achieve adequate cover at a detrimental cost to balance. If that was to be the case we would be stuck with a squad that would have to be shoe-horned into positions (we've seen this statement square pegs round holes umpteen times across the years) if the manager wanted to change the formation or pattern of play.
Why is 22 the upper limit, 22 was the number of player you raised earlier as requisite for a balanced squad. I agree with you that we need all 22 positions you state covered, I believe that anything over and above that is waste as there is cover for every position. Inevitably players will get injured so any of the 22 would potentially be able to get game time but how would we keep more than 22 players match fit? If there was an injury within the 22 then a similar type player could be brought in to provide cover, which is what I believe was the case with Thompson.
I would be entirely happy for us to add one more right winger to the squad but one player must go out to achieve that based not only on finances but on the number of players you said we need.
Dear lord ! You're playing this game of quoting what I said completely out of context. 1) I gave a very brief outline off the top of my head after you put me on the spot, not the gospel truth(as I also said earlier which you also have ignored !) 2) I never said it was an "Upper limit", if anything I meant at "at least 22" - use your noddle !  Wish I hadn't have bothered, you're not here to "debate" by sharing YOUR views, you're just trying to disprove me by your own twisted logic and ignoring everything I say.  This isn't a courtroom case ffs so stop acting like a pedantic, sarcastic boring jumped up little lawyer (and a bad one). My days debating with you are well and truly over.... |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
 Swansea_Mariner |
| September 3, 2011, 3:28pm |
|
Whiskey Drinker  Posts: 3,536
Posts Per Day: 0.60
Reputation: 85.79%
Rep Score: +22 / -3
Approval: +6,482
Gold Stars: 63
|
I believe that anything over and above that is waste as there is cover for every position.
There you go I never said you suggested 22 was the upper limit, I said I believe 22 is the upper limit, then gave you my reasons. I'm not trying to be pedantic or sarcastic just trying to understand what you want, but you keep changing and then saying I'm twisting which I'm clearly not as the above quote proves. If you want to change your preferred squad size and composition for discussion then that's your prerogative - just set out what you want. We seem to have regressed again and agree I think its best we just leave it, the game sounds good so far anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
| barralad |
| September 4, 2011, 9:55pm |
|
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,810
Posts Per Day: 2.31
Reputation: 79.47%
Rep Score: +85 / -22
Approval: +9,301
Gold Stars: 127
|
Quoted from 1600
Dear lord ! You're playing this game of quoting what I said completely out of context. 1) I gave a very brief outline off the top of my head after you put me on the spot, not the gospel truth(as I also said earlier which you also have ignored !) 2) I never said it was an "Upper limit", if anything I meant at "at least 22" - use your noddle ! Wish I hadn't have bothered, you're not here to "debate" by sharing YOUR views, you're just trying to disprove me by your own twisted logic and ignoring everything I say.
This isn't a courtroom case ffs so stop acting like a pedantic, sarcastic boring jumped up little lawyer (and a bad one). My days debating with you are well and truly over....
Hello Mr Kettle, you're black...  Having just belatedly returned from Forest Green I believe that the addition of Green to the squad has given it all of the balance it needs. Hopefully this rather large mountain out of what was after all a particularly small mole-hill can now be laid to rest.. |
| The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.
Joseph Joubert. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 80sglory |
| September 5, 2011, 12:35am |
|
Guest User |
Hello Mr Kettle, you're black...
And you're back (at me again !) Well all I can do is repeat what I said before:
Quoted from 80sglory
But explain to me why we're not going 4-4-2 at home (away doesn't count when you're setting up to defend) with Coulson starting on the right and I'll accept the squad has enough balance.
Can't say any fairer than that.
Want to bet me a fiver he'll start on the right on Saturday ? Actually I wouldn't be shy, maybe he will against a lesser side, but the balls entirely in your court. If he does it'll be interesting to see how he gets on - he'll need to improve his crossing though.
Hopefully this rather large mountain out of what was after all a particularly small mole-hill can now be laid to rest..
When it was written we had no left back. As I said it may only now be 1 position but if you don't play 4-4-2 a lot of other positions and players can be affected. Anyway, let's see what happens on Saturday.... |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| gary_elton |
| September 5, 2011, 12:43am |
|
 Vodka Drinker  Posts: 7,173
Posts Per Day: 1.19
Reputation: 79.43%
Rep Score: +23 / -6
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +1,243
Gold Stars: 6
|
we cud always sign Tom Newey from Rovrum....... he's a left back....
|
| All my pictures , Seem to fade to black and white.... (Reg Dwight) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 80sglory |
| September 5, 2011, 12:47am |
|
Guest User |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
|
| gary_elton |
| September 5, 2011, 12:51am |
|
Vodka Drinker Posts: 7,173
Posts Per Day: 1.19
Reputation: 79.43%
Rep Score: +23 / -6
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +1,243
Gold Stars: 6
|
watched the game... he was as sh1t for them as he always was for us.... happy days Rovrum... you can av im...
and welcome to im as well... thought Alan was Brill by the way....
|
| All my pictures , Seem to fade to black and white.... (Reg Dwight) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 80sglory |
| September 5, 2011, 12:58am |
|
Guest User |
Yep was quality...
Shame we never made a move to get him back on loan when he was out of favour there.
|
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| barralad |
| September 5, 2011, 7:55am |
|
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,810
Posts Per Day: 2.31
Reputation: 79.47%
Rep Score: +85 / -22
Approval: +9,301
Gold Stars: 127
|
Quoted from 1600
Yep was quality...
Shame we never made a move to get him back on loan when he was out of favour there.
Was he ever out of favour? Bit early for that surely? |
| The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.
Joseph Joubert. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Garth |
| September 5, 2011, 9:55am |
|
 Season Ticket Holder Posts: 11,497
Posts Per Day: 1.91
Reputation: 80.75%
Rep Score: +55 / -13
Approval: +4,936
Gold Stars: 27
|
we cud always sign Tom Newey from Rovrum....... he's a left back....
Better left back with Rotherham  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site Home
News
Football
Season
Database
Club
POM
Contact
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Swansea_Mariner
Logged
