God help us if he brings the doc as a striker, or brings him at all.
Keane Morrison and Elliot are obvious, probably Connolly or, with some luck, Yeates will be the next one.
Andy Reid can cover too, as he did quite well in Paris.
I think Elliott will be an important player in time. He does a lot of Robbie's running but he has Aldridge's eye for poachers' goals. Why on earth did Kerr think he could play wide in a 4-3-3 though?
Clinton is playing really well at the moment.
And (totally off-topic) I was delighted to see RMK dominate Gerrard. As usual the British media were well off in their predictions of his demise. I'm not a MUFC fan by the way.
I say the match report for Sunderland's game late last night on Sky Sports News, I'm pretty sure they referred to Elliott as a "Northern Ireland international striker", anyone else see this, or did they change it later on?
Indeed I did T. The same commentator also referred to Dean Whitehead as "Whitehouse" at least once during the report as well. Diddy.
PP
Semper in faecibus sole profundum variat
I think the other Stephen Elliott (doing well at Hull) is from Norn Iron. Bad mistake though. He'll know who he is when we beat England again in Stuttgart 2006!
You're right there Stuttgart, but he's Stuart Elliott, he is from the 6 counties thuogh.Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
And he's doing more than well, he's the leagues top scorer with over 20 goals despite being a left winger and not taking set peices! Some record, even if it is in the second division.
Saw him in action a couple of times at Motherwell and was reasonably impressed. I was surprised when he moved to Hull as I thought he could do a job at a higher level, he always had an eye for goal.
Kerr doesn't seem to rate Connolly at all since the Swiss 03 game.
id go for Macken ahead of connolly although i dont think many here will agree!
or maybe Lee.....
need a target man
Good!
I really don't get why we see it as an absolute must to have a target man, we seem to have an obession with it. The only reason a target man should be in the squad is if he's one of our four best strikers not because we need to have someone excessively tall in the squad for the sake ot it.
Agree 100%.
Antiquated view. I have the video of the qualifiers for 2002 World Cup and they interview this guy just before the Iran play off in Dublin and he basically says we need to score two or three, play a bit of the old “Charlton long ball” and get stuck in. It still makes me cringe when I see it. At the time, Iran were not a naïve fancy nation, they were a tall team of grafters with strong centre halves that would have just loved it if we’d humped the ball into the box. Fortunately we had done our homework and didn’t disrespect Iran this way.
We really don’t need a target man. Arsenal don’t play with one, nor do Man Utd and unless you count Drogba as a target man (he is top class in the air).
I must have missed that one.
Well for a world cup a team has a whole squad of players on the bench and it makes sense to have as many options as possible, especially when a team is playing countries from all over the world with much different styles etc...
i just dont think connolly would offer anything different to our other strikers Elliot Keane and Morrison, whereas havin a player who could hold up the ball and give us an extra aerial threat might be useful when were chasing a game for example...
remember Quinn V Spain '02 ..........
agreed.
The difference between Quinn in 02 and now is Quinn was good enough to be in the squad on merit. Alan Lee is not, why should we bring a sub par player to the world cup just because he's tall? What if we have a few injuries and have to start with him? Long ball is no longer our game and it doesn't suit the players we have I think the notion that we need someone tall in the squad is stupid. Alan Lee struggles to get a game for Cardiff and we're supposed to rely on him in the world cup just because he's bigger than our average striker? That's stupid, imo.
i was thinking more along the lines of Jon Macken ahead of David Connolly.
i think Macken is a better goal scorer than Connolly (both have fairly good div 1 goal scoring record but neither have set the world alight)and Macken also offers something different.
I don't think Macken should be near the team either, he isn't good enough. He's been embarassing for Man City when I've watched them, really looks out of his depth. To be fair to Connolly, and I'm not his biggest fan, he hasn't had a chance at the top level in club football yet bar the odd appearence in the Dutch top league. Also, his international record isn't that bad espically when you consider how many caps have been as a sub. I'd have him before Macken easily, though I'd rather we had a better option than either of them.
Morrison, Elliott, Keane and even Duff, Reid and soon enough McGeady and Flood are all pacy forward players. Why do we need another one? Connolly may be as good, or even better, than Macken but we don't want a 7th pacy striker who I'd be 100% sure wouldn't make it off the bench. At least Macken would give us an option if all plans fall apart.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks