Drop Fat Frankie?
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
Drop Fat Frankie?
Every right-thinking England fan knows what needs to happen if we're going to get the best out of our squad.
-
- Reliable
- Posts: 573
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 10:58 pm
- Location: The Gun Capital/The Pastie Capital
- Contact:
If we're persisting with this five man midfield then you have to keep him in there, one of his bobbled shots may go in. I agree we should revert back to a 4-4-2 with Hargreaves and Gerrard playing in the centre. Crouch should come instead of Lampard, no questions about it.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind - Gandhi
A cynic is man who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing - Wilde
I have a fax in my pocket - Gartside
A cynic is man who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing - Wilde
I have a fax in my pocket - Gartside
You sound like a Liverpool fan Quiff!
I suspect that with Portugal's 4-2-3-1 passing through the middle will be fairly fruitless and so we'll have to get it wide. As Karl says that probably means no place for Lampard, dropping him might wake him up a bit..
I suspect that with Portugal's 4-2-3-1 passing through the middle will be fairly fruitless and so we'll have to get it wide. As Karl says that probably means no place for Lampard, dropping him might wake him up a bit..
http://www.twitter.com/dan_athers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I voted NO, because he has to score sometime doesn't he? And next Saturday would be a good time. What I don't understand is that he is excellent for Chelsea but NEVER plays the same way for England, similar for Gerrard! It can't just be the formation that England play that makes them so poor.
Depression is just a state of mind, supporting Bolton is also a state of mind hence supporting Bolton must be depressing QED
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7404
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:08 pm
- Location: in your wife's dreams
- Contact:
That in theory is the best possible solution. But to do that would require belief that we are actually a great team capable of playing great football! I'll settle for a 'water-carrier' like Hargreaves.communistworkethic wrote:drop Frank, bring beckham in from the right and put Lennon out there.
I taunt the Chelsea fans I know, half-seriously, that Lampard is a luxury player that flatters to deceive, scores deflections and penalties late on in a game that has already been ground out by the real footballers like Makalele and co. I also suggest to them that Fat Frank goes MIA in any big game, for this very reason. From what I can see, despite Lampard clearly being a superb player, my taunts actually got more accurate over the course of the season, with every game in Europe or for England. This is much to my amusement in the office, but less so when it comes to supporting England.keveh wrote:I think that Lampard is an amazing player, but him and Gerrard can't play in the same team.
There's no doubt in who I would select to start.
But most importantly, when you select Fat Frank, you do so at the expense of Gerrard. Which one looks like a World Cup winner to you? Gerrard sometimes exudes the ability to win trophies on his own. We have to give him complete license to play.
FAT FRANK
We told you what he was like - did you listen?
His shoot on sight policy will reap it's reward sooner or later and everyone will
over him again, yet at the expense of how many better opportunities?
In future you should listen to us - we know what we are on about and Fatty simply aint up to it.
His shoot on sight policy will reap it's reward sooner or later and everyone will

In future you should listen to us - we know what we are on about and Fatty simply aint up to it.
-
- Icon
- Posts: 5043
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:58 am
- Location: 200 miles darn sarf
Re: FAT FRANK
Who are "we"? Not another clique, surely to God?Dormski wrote:We told you what he was like - did you listen?
His shoot on sight policy will reap it's reward sooner or later and everyone willover him again, yet at the expense of how many better opportunities?
In future you should listen to us - we know what we are on about and Fatty simply aint up to it.

God's country! God's county!
God's town! God's team!!
How can we fail?
COME ON YOU WHITES!!
God's town! God's team!!
How can we fail?
COME ON YOU WHITES!!
- Montreal Wanderer
- Immortal
- Posts: 12948
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
-
- Icon
- Posts: 5043
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:58 am
- Location: 200 miles darn sarf
Re: wq
You'll be rooting for that ladyboy Etherington presumably?Dormski wrote:West 'Am mate.
God's country! God's county!
God's town! God's team!!
How can we fail?
COME ON YOU WHITES!!
God's town! God's team!!
How can we fail?
COME ON YOU WHITES!!
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7404
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:08 pm
- Location: in your wife's dreams
- Contact:
I was assuming the 5 man midfield with Hargreaves in the holding role, which clearly is his strength. I don't want to take anything away from a creditable show at right back on sunday but I'd prefer it if Gary Neville were back there.50sQuiff wrote:That in theory is the best possible solution. But to do that would require belief that we are actually a great team capable of playing great football! I'll settle for a 'water-carrier' like Hargreaves.communistworkethic wrote:drop Frank, bring beckham in from the right and put Lennon out there.
Line up as
Robinson
Neville Ferdinand Terry A Cole
Hargreaves
Lennon Beckham Gerrard J Cole
Rooney
I think this would give Gerrard and Cole much more freedom and be a more fluid to support Rooney. I don't think that this gets the best from Rooney, his strength is playing behind a striker with a free role but it's the best formation in the circumstances.
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely
kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7042
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:36 am
- Location: HULL, BABY!
- Contact:
That actually looks quite a balanced side, with Lennon and Cole much more adapted the support Rooney upfront. With Beckham in the middle it gives him the opportunity to use his passing skills to sweep the ball to either wing, instead of everything going straight to Rooney. It also gives Gerrard his chance to really push forward as Lampard took that role against Ecuador leaving Gerrard to play the midfield engine role.communistworkethic wrote:I was assuming the 5 man midfield with Hargreaves in the holding role, which clearly is his strength. I don't want to take anything away from a creditable show at right back on sunday but I'd prefer it if Gary Neville were back there.50sQuiff wrote:That in theory is the best possible solution. But to do that would require belief that we are actually a great team capable of playing great football! I'll settle for a 'water-carrier' like Hargreaves.communistworkethic wrote:drop Frank, bring beckham in from the right and put Lennon out there.
Line up as
Robinson
Neville Ferdinand Terry A Cole
Hargreaves
Lennon Beckham Gerrard J Cole
Rooney
I think this would give Gerrard and Cole much more freedom and be a more fluid to support Rooney. I don't think that this gets the best from Rooney, his strength is playing behind a striker with a free role but it's the best formation in the circumstances.
As I stated in another thread, we have without doubt missed Neville at right back, especially when the right back was needed to push forward and overlap (something Neville does very well)
If that side ran out on Saturday, I would be more then happy.
YOU CLIMB OBSTACLES LIKE OLD PEOPLE FXCK!!!!!!!!!!!
-
- Hopeful
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:27 am
- Location: St Helens
- Contact:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests