Not done this for a while and the results seemed to have dipped since I stopped.

Heaton
Lawton Keane Mee Ward
Boyd Barton Hendrick Defour
Vokes Gray

2 changes are Vokes and Defour in from start tonight.

I would have preferred a Gray and Barnes partnership up front and the pace of Brady out wide from the start. Defour in for Barton, but can see Barton getting stuck in more than Defour would in the middle.

I'm actually a bit wary about Defour out wide so a bit reserved with this team now but hopefully it works.

Going for a 3-1 win for us under the floodlights.

Glad vokes is in. And defour. Facts are we play better and score more with them.

Defour on the left though with Brady benched is strange. Why no Brady again? He offers pace, width, delivery. Nobody in the team has that combination.

Looks like we set up to work hard, play compact.

Vokes without Brady is nonsensical and I want Vokes in. Vokes is good with his feet bit we need to get balls in. To do that we need a good crosser on his strongest side.

Would rather we have Defour and Vokes in every time. But in a different system to that.

Still reasonably confident. I suspect Dyche logic is that he wants it as much on the deck as we can against a physical stoke side.

Think Arfield is quite unlucky, if this is the case.

Still think he's a better option than Boyd on current form.

But we certainly need Defour in the team to give us more composure, as much as anything else. Tend to agree that I'd prefer to play Defour in the middle with Barton and Hendrick wide if we play all 3. Barnes out for Vokes is a slight surprise but against that, I do think Barnes has been far less effective in the last month or so.

It is an odd one and as shaky as Brady has looked (pun not intended), he needs gametime to get bedded into the squad in his strongest position. Not thrown on to work a miracle out of position.

With Defour bot playing full games I think this is set up for a 30/35 min Brady left wing appearance after Defour possibly keeps things tighter.

Was interesting to see Defour go on and push more central on Sat when he came on even though he replaced a wide man. Dont know if thst was Dyche, Defour or instinct that took him more central.

I can certainly see a case for playing Vokes tonight. Stoke are good at set plays and I think Voksey adds something to our defensive play if not exactly dynamic in the final third.

This Stoke team isn't that physical. its changed its spots a lot over the last couple of years.

I think the value of Brady to Vokes is being overplayed to an extent. Vokes gets on the end of crosses more than any of our other strikers, but he's at his most dangerous guiding dangerous crosses in at the near post rather than overpowering defenders at the back post. Defour's delivery from the left, although inswinging, arguably gives him as much chance of that as Brady's. I must admit though that if Defour is going to play wide, i'd prefer it to be on the right - as much as anything so he can slide passes down the sides of the centre backs to Gray.

I like the idea of Gray and Vokes starting again.

I am far more confident with Barnes coming off the bench than I am with Vokesy.

Agree with Defour on the right but would he cover Lowton as well as Boyd does?

Ward seems stronger on the back foot and calmer than Lowton so possibly that is the argument for keeping Boyd in the side to track back.

Stoke are different to pulis. But defensively and in the middle they are very physical. And even their creativr players like Arnautovic are big, physical players.

As long as we get Defour involved centrally and don't have him stuck out wide where he cannot influence things as much I'm happy with that lineup.

Tommy Lawton returned as a right back?

MarkGreen wrote:I like the idea of Gray and Vokes starting aain.

I am far more confident with Barnes coming off the bench than I am with Vokesy.

Hopefully it's for Vokes and not Gray. I'm quite conservative and prefer the big man/"little" man combo more than having 2 target men up top unless we have midfielders that can clean up the knockdowns (which we dont).

IanMcL wrote:Tommy Lawton returned as a right back?

If Tarkowski can play in goals, defence, midfield, out wide and up front - then anything is possible.

"It is an odd one and as shaky as Brady has looked (pun not intended), he needs gametime to get bedded into the squad in his strongest position. Not thrown on to work a miracle out of position."


Completely agree with this. Can't understand what's going on with Brady. It's plain for all to see that we lack pace and creativity, we then spend £13m on a left winger and hardly play him. When he does come on it's on the wrong wing.

I know he hasn't played that well yet, but the same applied to Hendrick who was pretty poor for his first 6-8 games and then started to improve after getting a start every game.

Brady is the type of player we need and I can't see this lack of game time doing much for his confidence.

I worry that he is struggling with SD's tactics who will want him to primarily be a second full back.

3putt wrote:I worry that he is struggling with SD's tactics who will want him to primarily be a second full back.

Given that he has spent much of his career as a primary full back, I can't see that being the issue.

3putt wrote:"I know he hasn't played that well yet, but the same applied to Hendrick who was pretty poor for his first 6-8 games and then started to improve after getting a start every game.

Poor for first 6-8 games? Far from it for me, a couple of disappointing games maybe.

So we are assuming that Gray is fit

Tall Paul wrote:Given that he has spent much of his career as a primary full back, I can't see that being the issue.

So what do you think the issue is then?

Or is it fine for our £13m winger being used as bit part sub to come on and play on the wrong win?

There is a wrong win? for the clarets!! - how is this possible

3putt wrote:So what do you think the issue is then?

Or is it fine for our £13m winger being used as bit part sub to come on and play on the wrong win?

I don't know what the issue is, but he hasn't particularly impressed when he has played. Dyche and the coaches see him in training every day, so they'll know better than we do. If he is struggling to get to grips with the system, we can't afford to be carrying a player in this league. I'm sure he'll prove his worth given time.

Tall Paul wrote:I don't know what the issue is, but he hasn't particularly impressed when he has played. Dyche and the coaches see him in training every day, so they'll know better than we do. If he is struggling to get to grips with the system, we can't afford to be carrying a player in this league. I'm sure he'll prove his worth given time.

Maybe he has been brought in for next season - either a a free'er role if we go down or it could be the start of more freedom within the framework and us adapting our game to suit our players strengths rather than adapting players to fit the team.

takes time for new boys to settle in - I have said this a few times - no pre-season with Sean no understanding of his way - few manage without it

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sp ... n/?ref=mac" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For all those who say he hasnt impressed he has still contributed to as many goals as our other wingers have all season.

He has looked indifferent at times. But he is quick, tricky and direct. These players will lose the ball more often. Because they try things more often.

I think it's perhaps clear that SD was hoping to be able to pick our far more creative and attacking minded, £13 million, LEFT winger to start games more often AFTER our position was secure and thus alter our "framework" to some extent with a view more towards next season. BUT our position isn't at all secure and Brady's relative lack of defensive attributes (from what we've seen so far and compared to say Arfield) mean it's been difficult fro SD to alter his mind set and thus his framework. Like evryone else I sincerely hope there's a whole lot more to come from Brady, but don't expect it to be tonight or any time soon!
On another note, Defour on the wing is to my mind (and most others I think) just a real waste. He's good, creative and forward thinking in the heart of midfield. Stuck out wide he looks like a fish out of water and to me it seemed to become apparent he was getting VERY naffed off (as well as injured/not entirely fit) when SD first stuck him out there!

cricketfieldclarets wrote:For all those who say he hasnt impressed he has still contributed to as many goals as our other wingers have all season.

We haven't got any other wingers. But if you mean Boyd and Arfield, they've contributed twice as many goals as Brady and they contribute more than just goals.

As I said, we can't afford to be carrying players in this league who don't fit the system and as CP said, that can take time with new signings.

Tall Paul wrote:I don't know what the issue is, but he hasn't particularly impressed when he has played. Dyche and the coaches see him in training every day, so they'll know better than we do. If he is struggling to get to grips with the system, we can't afford to be carrying a player in this league. I'm sure he'll prove his worth given time.

He hasn't particularly impressed yet (although has been effective), but my point is that he hasn't been given a real opportunity.

I don't buy into this been seen in training every day argument that is often used. Playing actual games is so different to training and players need to play games to either get match fit or gain confidence if that's what they are lacking.

To follow on from 3putt above which I agree with. We cant wait for "the right games" to bed him in as at this level there are none that can be classed as that (similar to how Spurs thought blooding Winks with a start was a safe option against us).

The only problem as mentioned above with Brady is the run we have had after he has signed (nothing to do with him per say) has meant that he has become a bit of a luxury and now doesnt fit the generic game that served us well over the first half of the season to gain points. The day we are safe mathamatically I think Brady will start playing from the start and get his run of games to settle peoperly, until then he will maybe get bit parts which wot help him much but then get a proper pre season and get drilled with what is expected of him and others in the team going into next season.

3putt wrote:He hasn't particularly impressed yet (although has been effective), but my point is that he hasn't been given a real opportunity.

I don't disagree with that, I was just saying that to go from there to worrying that he's struggling to adapt to playing as a second full back is a hell of a leap with little evidence to support it, especially as he's played full back regularly before.

I think this is SD's weakness. He is all about rigidity, hard graft, framework and being difficult to beat. He seems to struggle with flair players - Defour and now Brady being examples.

If you are looking to win games starting both Brady and Defour has to give you a better chance than the starting 11 on Saturday.

"Was interesting to see Defour go on and push more central on Sat when he came on even though he replaced a wide man."

Since when does either of Boyd or Arfield stay wide? That was part of the problem against Spurs on Sat. They only go wide when tracking back to help the fullbacks!

Nice to see him make changes with Vokes and Defour coming in. Brady should be on the left but it's upto Dyche and it's him who has too take all the critics if it doesn't work.

leedsdave wrote:"Was interesting to see Defour go on and push more central on Sat when he came on even though he replaced a wide man."

Since when does either of Boyd or Arfield stay wide? That was part of the problem against Spurs on Sat. They only go wide when tracking back to help the fullbacks!

Boyd was putting in tackles and closing down at LM on Saturday whilst playing RM. The last time Defour started on the left hand side he generally stuck out wide and tried to make a go of being a wider player. On Saturday he drifted in and played a proper central role.... Arfield on that side usually tries to keep generally wide but leave room for Ward on the overlap - Defour was around the centre circle still at times.

3putt wrote:So what do you think the issue is then?

Or is it fine for our £13m winger being used as bit part sub to come on and play on the wrong win?

Why does there have to be an issue?

ClaretTony wrote:Why does there have to be an issue?

An Issue isn't always a really bad thing CT.

I think most of us can see that 3Putt is asking for opinions on why people feel Brady isn't bedded into the team properly or why our marquee signing can't get into the squad in his preferred position. You know ..... Like people do on a messageboard.

would like to see the above players in a 433 with Gray and Boyd providing the width.

Chester Perry wrote:So we are assuming that Gray is fit

Dyche said last night everyone was fit bar the obvious long term ones

We need to find a system of play that uses Brady and Defour in attacking positions, not holding my breath though!

I bet Brady didn't realise he would be running backwards most of the games when he signed. I would have him on for his set pieces if nothing else.

I really hope he isn't on the right again that is just really poor....

claretandy wrote:would like to see the above players in a 433 with Gray and Boyd providing the width.

I wouldnt mind seeing Gray usig the channels more as I feel we have no utilised this part of his game enough. Last season he set up some quality goals from doing this and also put in a good ball on Saturday from getting wide.

I don't buy this 'bedding in' malarkey. Brady's set pieces alone should warrant a start. He isn't some kid just breaking into the team. The fact Dyche still picks Arfield and Boyd over players like Brady and Defour says more about him than it does about them.

Hendrick has had some excellent performances on the right of a four for Ireland. Whilst not a winger he works back well and has that ball carrying ability we lack. I'd stick him out there with Westwood coming into the middle. Much as we all want Defour to start it's not happening folks.
I'd also start Brady on the left, in front of Ward. They know each others game well and would create.

Heaton
Lowton-Keane-Mee-Ward
Hendrick-Barton-Westwood-Brady
Vokes-Gray.

3 changes will be too much for SD so this team is in my dreams.

I'm afraid from what I have seen of vokes lately, he'd be lucky to get on the bench for me. I know he hasn't had much game time recently, but you would have to be a member of his immediate family to suggest when he has got on the field, he's been any better than poor. Certainly not grabbed the game, but I suppose that's the other players or the managers fault.

I always thought the idea of a striker coming on as a sub was to change the game? Maybe he came on for his defensive capabilities.

Anyway, gray and Barnes up top for me. Defence picks itself. The dilemna for me is where to fit defour in. We will need the steel of Barton and hendrick in the middle, but defour out wide doesn't seem right and doesn't look right. But then again, we don't really play out wide so maybe that's why arfield and boydy always play.

Let's hope Sean sorts it out. It's what he's paid for. We need all three tonite to take a bit of pressure off the weekend.

Would love to see this formation but will prob never happen

Hendrick Barton Westwood Brady

Defour

Gray

Defence and keeper pick themselves, would swop Hendrick for Westwood if JBG was available...

We really need to get Brady putting some crosses in down the left!

Tall Paul wrote:We haven't got any other wingers. But if you mean Boyd and Arfield, they've contributed twice as many goals as Brady and they contribute more than just goals.

As I said, we can't afford to be carrying players in this league who don't fit the system and as CP said, that can take time with new signings.

Really?

bobinho wrote:I'm afraid from what I have seen of vokes lately, he'd be lucky to get on the bench for me. I know he hasn't had much game time recently, but you would have to be a member of his immediate family to suggest when he has got on the field, he's been any better than poor. Certainly not grabbed the game, but I suppose that's the other players or the managers fault.

I always thought the idea of a striker coming on as a sub was to change the game? Maybe he came on for his defensive capabilities.

Anyway, gray and Barnes up top for me. Defence picks itself. The dilemna for me is where to fit defour in. We will need the steel of Barton and hendrick in the middle, but defour out wide doesn't seem right and doesn't look right. But then again, we don't really play out wide so maybe that's why arfield and boydy always play.

Let's hope Sean sorts it out. It's what he's paid for. We need all three tonite to take a bit of pressure off the weekend.

Vokes came on for Wales last week and looked sharp and linked up very well. He is good on the deck and quicker than he gets credit for. The facts are we always score more with Vokes and strikers play better alongside him.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Really?

Yes really.

1 (Boyd) + 1 (Arfield) = 2 x 1 (Brady)

My apologies, you said "contributed to". I retract my earlier statement

Although, having said that, Boyd and Arfield have 3 assists between them in FPL.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Stoke are different to pulis. But defensively and in the middle they are very physical. And even their creativr players like Arnautovic are big, physical players.

Yeah that Shaqiri and Berahino are big lads.

So collectively they have scored 1 more than him in 36 games vs his 7. And he has assisted 1 to their collective none. They have featured over 4,000 minutes and he has featured 304 minutes.

So I am correct - he has contributed the same amount of goals as two wingers combined and more than both individually.

ClaretTony wrote:Poor for first 6-8 games? Far from it for me, a couple of disappointing games maybe.

I agree, thought Hendrick's best game for us was his debut at home to Watford.

KRBFC wrote:Yeah that Shaqiri and Berahino are big lads.

Shaqiri hasnt played since January.

Berahino is hardly small, he is still 5'11.

Stoke are still a physical side. Even Whelan who is short is physical. Small players can be physical.

There entire back four are over 6 foot. They play a 6 foot 4 winger. They play a 6 foot 1 attacking midfielder. They play another 6 foot winger in Walters.

And they bring on the diminutive Peter Crouch now and again.