Signing in the morning

Quoted from Poojah

Yeah, more Gregor Robertson than Conor Townsend, but nothing wrong in that. He surprised me with how bad he was on Tuesday night though - hopefully just a one off and he can get it out of his system as I think there’s a solid enough full-back in there.

The thing with gregor though was that although he lacked pace he had a very good cross from deep so still offered something in attack. Crookes most definitely lacks that. He is also clearly not the sort of player to beat a man and cut a back a cross after getting in behind. This means he offers nothing going forward.

I agree with the opinion otherwise of being very much a steady Eddie reliable player defensively and pretty tall for a full back so useful in the air defensively etc. It's strange though, despite this defensive steadiness I seem to remember that up until a couple of months ago we did seem to have a weakness for letting goals in from that left side when we were talking about weaknesses. (can't really think if that has continued mind) I wonder if that was due to having to cut inside a bit as the team shifted across to accommodate effete being a bit further forward. And that in turn meant that with crookes not being the quickest that when teams broke they had a bit more time on that left side? Because he seems very reliable when  the play is directly in front of him.

To be honest since he's return one thing I have been really disappointed in is hursts recruitment at full back. He has had a few shockers to be honest, bunny the worst (possibly for health reasons) but Haversham was poor and revan doesn't look upto men's football in division 5. Effete, crookes and sears whilst not bad are not a patch on the likes of magnay, tait, Danny Andrew, Connor townsend, and Robertson who he brought in in his first spell.

Habergham  not Haversham flipping predictive text!

Toontown you are in for it now pal 😂

Quoted from quebec38

Lmao. Cringing for you here.

Don’t. Look back at your posts on this thread and own what you’ve written. You were challenged. You didn’t like it. Save your cringes for yourself.

Quoted from chaos33

Don’t. Look back at your posts on this thread and own what you’ve written. You were challenged. You didn’t like it. Save your cringes for yourself.

😬😂

Quoted from friskneymariner

So where does belittling someone for a misplaced comma fit in? seems to be like a pretty shallow and vacuous to me,come across a few people like you before

Errr….

Quoted from Knut Anders Fosters Voles

I’ve never had a threesome but I guarantee it would be just like this.

Chaos and Quebec banging away like middle-class families on Clap For Carers night and me, crouched in the corner, bashing F5 like my life depended on it.

😂

Quoted from Lincoln Mariner 56

Would it make sense to go with three at the back given no right back and play 2 out of Sousa, Wright & Scannell as the wide players, Fox, Coke, in front of back three with McD, McA and Taylor up top?

Hopefully quite an attacking approach.

That might work if Wright and Scannell weren't made of twigs and cotton.

Think it's also quite a big change to personnel and formation, so I would be inclined just to keep it simple and keep LK at right back.

If Wright and the new lad were fit and raring to go, then maybe playing with 3 at the back and wing backs could work, but too many ifs and buts in that scenario I think.

Quoted from Knut Anders Fosters Voles

I’ve never had a threesome but I guarantee it would be just like this.

Chaos and Quebec banging away like middle-class families on Clap For Carers night and me, crouched in the corner, bashing F5 like my life depended on it.

Surely that would be a foursome Knut - you're missing out Friskney who's come across a few people like Chaos before.

Call it a hunch but I'm going to guess Hurst will not be picking Scannell at wing back either this Saturday or on any others.