Wanderers v Cottagers
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- Hopeful
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:03 pm
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
Without a doubtGooner Girl wrote:I'm predicting a 0-0 draw...
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 44175
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
Hangerland doesn't "own" KD any more than he does any other striker. He's a top class central defender and rarely plays badly. What we need are for the rest to play well,and KD isn't a cert to play yet. COME ON YOU WHITES.Gail Platz wrote:It will be really tempting to play KD after his stormer against Wolves but as a couple have pointed out already, he has no chance against Hangeland so I think we should get back to the 4-5-1 again.
Usually a boring game but I'm not too arsed as long as we come away with 3 points.
COYWM!


Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
-
- Hopeful
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:18 pm
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
TANGODANCER wrote:Hangerland doesn't "own" KD any more than he does any other striker. He's a top class central defender and rarely plays badly.Gail Platz wrote:It will be really tempting to play KD after his stormer against Wolves but as a couple have pointed out already, he has no chance against Hangeland so I think we should get back to the 4-5-1 again.
Usually a boring game but I'm not too arsed as long as we come away with 3 points.
COYWM!
I think Hangeland has moire trouble against a pacy striker who takes the ball to his feet, runs the line and and whose pace takes him through an offside trap than he does against a striker whose main threat is winning aerial ball...
so - I suspect he does (unfortunately) "own" KD more than he does some other strikers...
that's not to say KD might not have a part to play in this game - I just hope it's not as a starter..
do you want coyle to start with KD?
COYW!!!!
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 44175
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
Yes, because, like it or no, we do play areiel ball and N'gog isn' the best with that. Fulham have a better midfield than us and 4-4-2 isn't the best idea. That's why ariel will be the order of the day and Davies at least will keep defenders occupied and then bring a fresh striker on later when we, maybe, start to come forward with the ball. Then again, what I want won't have any bearing anyway.thebish wrote: do you want coyle to start with KD?COYW!!!!
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1861
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:32 pm
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
OfficialBWFC: BWFC: Bogdan, Ricketts, Wheater, Ream, Alonso, Reo-Coker, Pratley, M Davies, Petrov, Ryo, Ngog [via Twitter]
Born to be a Wanderer!!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1861
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:32 pm
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
OfficialBWFC: BWFC Subs: Jaaskelainen, Steinsson, Eagles, Knight, K Davies, Klasnic, Sordell [via Twitter]
Born to be a Wanderer!!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
- Little Green Man
- Icon
- Posts: 4471
- Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 9:34 pm
- Location: Justin Edinburgh
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
Seriously what happen to tuncay? Nothing anyone
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
SURELY Ngog will score one day?? be nice if it was today!!
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 44175
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
Have to hope it's injury keeping him out because, if not, he must be seriously pxssed off.elfil76 wrote:Seriously what happen to tuncay? Nothing anyone
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
- plymouth wanderer
- Icon
- Posts: 4571
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:20 pm
- Location: Er Plymouth
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
TANGODANCER wrote:Have to hope it's injury keeping him out because, if not, he must be seriously pxssed off.elfil76 wrote:Seriously what happen to tuncay? Nothing anyone
and who'd blame him
it's absolute crimnal
Never get into an argument with an idiot. i'll bring you down to my level and beat you with experience
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
He had a haircut?elfil76 wrote:Seriously what happen to tuncay? Nothing anyone

The voices in my head may not be real...but they have some great ideas!
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 31613
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
Tuncay: we've three forwards on the bench, including our top scorer, club captain (two in two) and pacy £4m youngster. We're also, notably correctly, playing one up top and as an advanced midfielder Tuncay is at least third choice to Mavies and Pratley - and Coyle has previously played Eagles there, so Tuncay is arguably fourth-choice linkman and fifth-choice striker. Not saying that's right but it seems to be the case.
Sensible selection for our best choice of three points this weekend. Good luck Marcos, good luck Wanderers, COYWM.
Sensible selection for our best choice of three points this weekend. Good luck Marcos, good luck Wanderers, COYWM.
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
who would you suggest taking off the bench or out of the starting lineup to accommodate Tuncay?plymouth wanderer wrote:TANGODANCER wrote:Have to hope it's injury keeping him out because, if not, he must be seriously pxssed off.elfil76 wrote:Seriously what happen to tuncay? Nothing anyone
and who'd blame him
it's absolute crimnal
(be careful of saying Sordell - cos there has been a campaign for his inclusion elsewhere on the forum!)

-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1861
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:32 pm
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
The annoying thing is 3 forwards, 2 defenders and 1 midfielder on bench. We won't use any more than 2 of the forwards so 1 is pointless being there. I know we are short of midfielders but surely a youngster would be better, then if someone gets injured, at least we have a replacement instead of changing the system.
Born to be a Wanderer!!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
- plymouth wanderer
- Icon
- Posts: 4571
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:20 pm
- Location: Er Plymouth
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
thebish wrote:who would you suggest taking off the bench or out of the starting lineup to accommodate Tuncay?plymouth wanderer wrote:TANGODANCER wrote:Have to hope it's injury keeping him out because, if not, he must be seriously pxssed off.elfil76 wrote:Seriously what happen to tuncay? Nothing anyone
and who'd blame him
it's absolute crimnal
(be careful of saying Sordell - cos there has been a campaign for his inclusion elsewhere on the forum!)
im not referring to this game im on about the season as whole
tuncay has't had any real chance to show what he could do and on the odd occasion where he's managed to get on coyles played him right wing
if sparky does't play well today i would put tuncay there....in you know his natural position
just dont think lad has has a fair crack of the wip
Never get into an argument with an idiot. i'll bring you down to my level and beat you with experience
-
- Hopeful
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:25 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
But we already saw last week that Coyle would rather change the formation then play a inexperienced midfielder. No point wasting a spot on the bench if there is no chance he will use them. With the 3 forwards on the bench, they all offer something different so it gives Coyle options for later in the game...I'm ok with it to be honest.Turkish Trotter wrote:The annoying thing is 3 forwards, 2 defenders and 1 midfielder on bench. We won't use any more than 2 of the forwards so 1 is pointless being there. I know we are short of midfielders but surely a youngster would be better, then if someone gets injured, at least we have a replacement instead of changing the system.
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1967
- Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:36 am
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
+1Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Sensible selection for our best choice of three points this weekend. Good luck Marcos, good luck Wanderers, COYWM.
Who do they have on that side? Duff?
The players you fail to sign never lose you any money.
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1861
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:32 pm
Re: Wanderers v Cottagers
pagey_BWFC wrote:But we already saw last week that Coyle would rather change the formation then play a inexperienced midfielder. No point wasting a spot on the bench if there is no chance he will use them. With the 3 forwards on the bench, they all offer something different so it gives Coyle options for later in the game...I'm ok with it to be honest.Turkish Trotter wrote:The annoying thing is 3 forwards, 2 defenders and 1 midfielder on bench. We won't use any more than 2 of the forwards so 1 is pointless being there. I know we are short of midfielders but surely a youngster would be better, then if someone gets injured, at least we have a replacement instead of changing the system.
Sordell ????????????????
Born to be a Wanderer!!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests