Anyobe think that's his best position?

He had some good runs but moved inside too much and left Humphries to do all the wing work - to the point that Humph was knackered in the last 15 mins. I'd much prefer Foster in the middle with Flemming behind him and Brownhill in the midfield.

I know I’m not specifically answering your question, but I would like to see Hannibal starting on the left on Wednesday.

Foster looked assured on the left and his direct running and hassling caused Sunderland problems, alongside his pace.

Not sure why Parker persisted with Brownhill for as long as he did - by his standards he stunk the place out last night. Would’ve preferred to see Brownhill go off for Sarmiento with Flemming playing behind Foster.

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:08 am

I know I’m not specifically answering your question, but I would like to see Hannibal starting on the left on Wednesday.

I concur, the way we set up against at Sheffield Utd despite all the players coming back from injury is our best team.

Also means you can now bring Foster, Sarmiento and Koleosho on from the bench.

We need a striker up top. At the minute the only fit, not past his best striker we have is Foster.

Stick Flemming and Hannibal behind him as dual 10s

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:08 am

I know I’m not specifically answering your question, but I would like to see Hannibal starting on the left on Wednesday.

I wouldn’t. We’re playing Plymouth, I’d rather we had forward-thinking, attacking players who can carry the ball well out wide - Foster’s run and pass for Anthony last night is what we need more of. Plus he needs game time. Let’s go for some goals on Weds.

The problem we have is Humphreys is not a left back. If we decide to play a narrow inside forward then we need a proper left back who's comfortable in possession because it will be he who holds the width on that side.
I really think a good left back could make a huge difference in this team.

If you don’t think Humphreys is comfortable in possession, I have no idea what you’ve been watching.

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:08 am

I know I’m not specifically answering your question, but I would like to see Hannibal starting on the left on Wednesday.

I'd prefer him coming in for Laurent against Plymouth

I want to see Foster running through the middle.

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:36 am

If you don’t think Humphreys is comfortable in possession, I have no idea what you’ve been watching.

I think his first instant is to take go backwards with his first touch out of trouble and go back to centre half. All very safe.

What he doesn't do is offer much clever movement, intricate passing or make any make many penetrative runs either overlapping or underlapping. Part of that will be tactical but he just isn't a natural full back.

We should be aiming higher, there's clear room for improvement in that position.

dougcollins wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:41 am

I want to see Foster running through the middle.

Foster can’t play with his back to goal though which is what he will have to do through the middle, unless we have a creative number 10 in the team

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:43 am

We should be aiming higher, there's clear room for improvement in that position.

Says the guy who only last week was saying Jay Rod could play in front of the back 4 as a defensive midfielder.

123EasyasBFC wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:46 am

Foster can’t play with his back to goal though which is what he will have to do through the middle, unless we have a creative number 10 in the team

Yes, it'll take a change.

And Flemming isn't suitable, I know that.

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:36 am

If you don’t think Humphreys is comfortable in possession, I have no idea what you’ve been watching.

He did some pretty weird stuff last night, including pinging one straight into touch from a couple of yards away.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:43 am

I think his first instant is to take go backwards with his first touch out of trouble and go back to centre half. All very safe.

What he doesn't do is offer much clever movement, intricate passing or make any make many penetrative runs either overlapping or underlapping. Part of that will be tactical but he just isn't a natural full back.

We should be aiming higher, there's clear room for improvement in that position.

Yeah, like I said….

dougcollins wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:51 am

He did some pretty weird stuff last night, including pinging one straight into touch from a couple of yards away.

Clearly those were his instructions.

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:08 am

I know I’m not specifically answering your question, but I would like to see Hannibal starting on the left on Wednesday.

I'd only do this if Foster is going through the middle with Flemming behind in a slightly adapted attacking shape. Hannibal is an upgrade technically on Laurent (and i thought we missed him last night) but hes industrious more than composed and creative and so he doesn't solve our lack of quality in the final third. In the games the onus is on us to win and make the running, therefore, I'm not sure you can play all of Hannibal, Laurent and Brownhill.

As for Foster, I think left side is a role he can play effectively. I think he'd be at his best as the furthest forwards striker but given freedom to drift left, with the focal point of the attack playing off him (think a poor mans version of the Arsenal side that had Bergkamp playing behind Henry. That's the shape described above and I'd assumed this was the logic of signing Flemming. It still might be. But against Leeds I expect to see the same shape we saw last night so I'd have thought it would be worth giving it more time to bed in against Plymouth. Last night it was evident that Foster was still working out his runs, both in behind and to get into the area when we were crossing from the right. He didn't really dovetail his movement with Flemming's and we need to five that every opportunity.

Of course, if Hannibal replaced Laurent, there should be the flexibility and fluidity for the difference between the two set ups to be more theory than practice.

I think he’s absolutely sh!te and his playacting in the second half was totally embarrassing, but I am more than happy to be proven wrong and will be happy to eat humble pie if that ever happens.

dougcollins wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:50 am

Yes, it'll take a change.

And Flemming isn't suitable, I know that.

Flemming certainly isn’t the creative number 10, Flemming is the number 10 you have when you have 2 creative wide players

Raconteur wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:49 am

Says the guy who only last week was saying Jay Rod could play in front of the back 4 as a defensive midfielder.

I feel slightly embarrassed for you that you remember my individual comments from a week ago when I have literally never seen your posts before. But just to humour you, as you seem to think you've somehow 'owned' me, I'm not against positional changes, I just think Humphreys looks a bit clumsy and is symptomatic of the general cautiousness of the team in possession.

In terms of Jay Rod I said it would be an interesting experiment because he has a lot of attributes that would be a good fit for the role and as I said at the time, its not something we are ever likely to see.

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:51 am

Yeah, like I said….

Relax, I wasn't arguing. It's a football forum for conversation, not everything has to be an argument.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 12:48 pm

Relax, I wasn't arguing. It's a football forum for conversation, not everything has to be an argument.

Bit weird you took that as an argument.

Think we need to see more from Foster overall than we have to date.

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 12:54 pm

Bit weird you took that as an argument.

Oh yes it does!

Created absolutely naff all, when Anthony has the ball on the right, you have to gamble and make a run across the defender, instead he just stands there hiding.

Then he goes upfront for the final 20 minutes and of course, it’s the 20 minutes where the ball doesn’t stick upfront and just keeps coming back at us. Foster would rather throw himself to the ground and roll around than fight for the ball.

I have seen more than enough of this guy, one of the most non threatening centre forwards I have ever seen. Technically way below the level, not suited to this country at all. The only way he’ll score a goal is if he mis kicks it and it bounces off his arse like at Reading.

The main issue with him on the left is his lack of awareness out of possession.

Several times last night their right back ran off him and although it didn’t cost us it would still be a big worry for me in future games.

KRBFC wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 1:23 pm

Created absolutely naff all

There's me thinking he played Anthony in for a shot on goal, along with a brilliant knockdown for Flemming for our penalty shout.

CoolClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 1:32 pm

There's me thinking he played Anthony in for a shot on goal, along with a brilliant knockdown for Flemming for our penalty shout.

I would caveat that the delaying of playing the pass to Anthony allowed the defenders to cut Anthony’s angle for a shot. It’s extremely fine margins with foster, he has all the ability in the world to be a good player but just hasn’t been able to he consistent yet

Winstonswhite wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 12:00 pm

his playacting in the second half was totally embarrassing

Agreed. I hope Parker has a word about this.

He’s direct, aggressive and tenacious. He’s also reasonably quick.

In other words he’s a bit different to most of our other attacking options.

I’ve no problem with him getting an extended run on the left.

I'm not his biggest fan by a long way, but I thought he was the best of the front four last night. He seems quite comfortable playing inside left (in old money) and his ability to run with the ball can actually be utilised. The run to set up Anthony in the first half was tremendous. I'd happily stick with him on the left. The issue we have, as we all know, is up front. Neither Foster or Flemming can play as a lone striker.

Whilst everyone seems distracted by Tommy Cannon, I'd go all out for Ferguson at Brighton. We need someone who attacks the ball in the middle and occupies the opposition centre halves. He could be the difference between automatic promotion and the lottery of the play-offs. We have enough in all other areas, but we're severely lacking up front.

CoolClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 1:32 pm

There's me thinking he played Anthony in for a shot on goal, along with a brilliant knockdown for Flemming for our penalty shout.

It was a poor pass however you’re correct about the Anthony one.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:29 am

The problem we have is Humphreys is not a left back. If we decide to play a narrow inside forward then we need a proper left back who's comfortable in possession because it will be he who holds the width on that side.
I really think a good left back could make a huge difference in this team.

Humphreys is a class player. He may not be a true full-back but he's giving it a damn good fist.

ecc wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 2:17 pm

Humphreys is a class player. He may not be a true full-back but he's giving it a damn good fist.

Not saying he's a bad player. I just don't think he's what we need at left back at present. Especially once the Leeds game is out of the way. We will probably expect to dominate possession in close to 100 percent of the remaining fixtures, so for me we need to accept conceding a few more goals in order to give us a bigger attacking threat from the full back positions along with others.

Two good surging runs; one resulting in the chance for Anthony and the other he chose to shoot.

Couple of other times he was in good positions but it was so obvious he was going to cut inside he made it so easy for the full back.

If he's going to plsy there, he needs a trick or two to sell the full back or keep him guessing.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 2:33 pm

Not saying he's a bad player. I just don't think he's what we need at left back at present. Especially once the Leeds game is out of the way. We will probably expect to dominate possession in close to 100 percent of the remaining fixtures, so for me we need to accept conceding a few more goals in order to give us a bigger attacking threat from the full back positions along with others.

Humphreys is our best crosser.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 12:47 pm

I feel slightly embarrassed for you that you remember my individual comments from a week ago when I have literally never seen your posts before. But just to humour you, as you seem to think you've somehow 'owned' me, I'm not against positional changes, I just think Humphreys looks a bit clumsy and is symptomatic of the general cautiousness of the team in possession.

In terms of Jay Rod I said it would be an interesting experiment because he has a lot of attributes that would be a good fit for the role and as I said at the time, its not something we are ever likely to see.

It's fine if you're embarrassed, I'm not. It's not like I need to scour your posts . You post outlandish thoughts on a daily basis so it's quite easy for me to remember what I've read. I'm glad you had never seen my posts before, I'm not competing on that front and I definitely don't think I've owned you.

I was trying to make sense of you thinking we need to be looking at something higher than Humphreys for the benefit of the team while at the same time thinking it would be a good idea to give J Rod a go as a defensive midfielder to prolong his career (which would be to the detriment of the team)

Raconteur wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:21 pm

It's fine if you're embarrassed, I'm not. It's not like I need to scour your posts . You post outlandish thoughts on a daily basis so it's quite easy for me to remember what I've read. I'm glad you had never seen my posts before, I'm not competing on that front and I definitely don't think I've owned you.

I was trying to make sense of you thinking we need to be looking at something higher than Humphreys for the benefit of the team while at the same time thinking it would be a good idea to give J Rod a go as a defensive midfielder to prolong his career (which would be to the detriment of the team)

I didn't say we should start him in the league. I was saying it would be an interesting experiment. Technically good, strong, good in the air and a really good passer of the ball.
It used to be much more common to see players like him drop deeper, nowadays not so much.

Foster right
Barnes centre
Hannibal/Anthony left

I think I’ve seen enough of Foster now to decide he’s not the answer, whether playing down the middle or out wide. The lack of quality up front is a big problem for us. Maybe Foster can get into some kind of form with a run of games, but personally I don’t think he’s up to it.

helmclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 19, 2025 8:43 am

I think I’ve seen enough of Foster now to decide he’s not the answer, whether playing down the middle or out wide. The lack of quality up front is a big problem for us. Maybe Foster can get into some kind of form with a run of games, but personally I don’t think he’s up to it.

I've been of a similar opinion on him for a while. When he runs with the ball he look a threat, but only did it a few times on Friday.

Is that down to him lacking confidence and ability to call for/get on the ball to be more involved in the game. Either way, he doesn't impact games very often. I think it just boils down to him being an average player and whilst I'm not beating him up for it, mentally not up to it for the levels we require.

He's had his issues as we all know. Professional sport requires you to be so strong in this area. I've been watching snooker this week and they had some good discussion around the mental side of it. How it impacts their game unless they're 100%, or as close as you can be mentally. If you're not, then at elite levels the game swallows you up. I appreciate that's an individual sport, but generally the point stands. You can't expect yourself to maximise any talent unless you're fine tuned in all aspects.

I'm by no means trivialising mental health, or holding it against Foster but I think it's a concern which lowers his output, amongst other things.

At the moment (and we may to assume we are not bringing in a striker), he is the only potential explosive forward we have, with possibly Anthony the only other person behind him. At Reading he was great, and v Sunderland he made some strong runs, and set up Anthony for a chance. He needs to work closer with the full back-he did this well at Reading with Pires. By the same gesture I am struggling to remember what Fleming did for 70 or 80 minutes other than being slow for the headed knock down when we all appealed for a penalty. So with what we have Foster has to start and also be given a run, and I think Parker will go this route

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:26 am

I wouldn’t. We’re playing Plymouth, I’d rather we had forward-thinking, attacking players who can carry the ball well out wide - Foster’s run and pass for Anthony last night is what we need more of. Plus he needs game time. Let’s go for some goals on Weds.

Ayyyyyye.

Assist for Foster - should've been two in two...

I (and others) have said it all along: the tactics have been fine; we just didn't have the quality in the final third. Now that Flemming is back fully fit (took him a few games to get going) along with Lyle, we're looking a lot more dangerous going forward.