| Do we cope ok without Burns? 11:22 - Mar 17 with 1823 views | SomethingBlue |
Serious question as I'm not sure the second half from yesterday is particular evidence either way. I guess we have to be ready for a Hirst-style lay-off, with a better scenario that he's back for any play-off ties. Just feels to me that the direct threat in behind down that side is so important to us and so is his telepathy with Chaplin in particular – when he's been out of the side things generally haven't been quite the same. We're lucky to have a player in Jackson who can do considerable elements of that and ensure we retain the threat but there's still a drop-off. Clearly it's going to hamper us, the timing is awful and I wonder how KM tweaks it.
|  |
| |  |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:24 - Mar 17 with 1780 views | textbackup |
Could Clarke play that roll? |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:26 - Mar 17 with 1754 views | bluefunk |
You’d guess one other option is Omari on the right, preferably with Chaplin back in the 10, as I don’t really see Sarmiento or Harness being as effective there. |  | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:27 - Mar 17 with 1729 views | norfsufblue |
We have in my opinion 4 players that can a job down that right side all of whom bring different qualities... Jezza, Omari, Jacko, and not forgetting Clarkey.........
I'm sure KM will be able to do something with that lot and he's got them all on the training pitch for about a fortnight. [Post edited 17 Mar 11:29]
|  | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:27 - Mar 17 with 1730 views | SomethingBlue |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:26 - Mar 17 by bluefunk |
You’d guess one other option is Omari on the right, preferably with Chaplin back in the 10, as I don’t really see Sarmiento or Harness being as effective there. |
I expect that's how it'll go most of the time, with Jackson as the more direct alternative if we find ourselves in a Bristol City scenario. | |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 with 1721 views | AVJones |
I feel this is one position we now have solid cover. Hutchinson, Sarmiento and Jackson, plus Clarke in a more defensive version, all offer options.
We’ll miss Burns but not like we’d miss Davis. | | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 with 1724 views | JakeITFC |
Jackson was brilliant yesterday, his usual busy and tireless self but with some moments of real quality - a couple of great first touches from aerial balls and some really good crosses.
The game suited him and we looked for that ball in behind for him quite often which they never really dealt with, and I think we are a better team when we have that vertical threat (the Bristol City game (pre-Burns sub) especially showed how to stop us a bit by squeezing the field when we don’t have that direct runner in that position to get the defence turned around). An objectively better front four probably contains Hutchinson, Chaplin and Broadhead from the start but I think we will see Jackson start a few of our closing fixtures if Burns is a season ender. |  | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 with 1718 views | SomethingBlue |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:24 - Mar 17 by textbackup |
Could Clarke play that roll? |
Probably not quite but if he's fresh & relatively untroubled by his injury then his running power will nonetheless help massively in next few weeks. | |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 with 1716 views | Nutkins_Return |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:24 - Mar 17 by textbackup |
Could Clarke play that roll? |
No. Can he play in that position. To a degree. Can he offer anything like what Burns does. Absolutely not.
We can cope without Burns for individual games and get results. Will it effect us over 8 games. Yes. Someone has to step up and not just as a starter, our finishers are so important. It will most likely be Hutch from.tjenstart with Jackson off the bench (but I do expect McKenna to start Jackson occasionally from a tactical perspective and keep Hutch fresh.
Humphreys may get some opportunity off the bench for Chappers. Think he can do that 10 role in 20 min cameos. Sarmiento and Harness the more obvious choices. Taylor could do a job but I don't see him as a 10 at all other than a threat 25 yards out. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 with 1715 views | LeoMuff |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:26 - Mar 17 by bluefunk |
You’d guess one other option is Omari on the right, preferably with Chaplin back in the 10, as I don’t really see Sarmiento or Harness being as effective there. |
That’s how we lined up last time he was injured, though Kayden looked excellent there yesterday. Let’s face it Burns is irreplaceable for us, when Omari was out there we weren’t quite as good, we will cope but we will lose a little attacking threat.
Let’s hope it’s only a short term thing. |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:29 - Mar 17 with 1713 views | tonybied |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:24 - Mar 17 by textbackup |
Could Clarke play that roll? |
I think it's more likely Hutch will play that role, as long as Chaplin returns from injury after the international break. Even if Chappers doesn't return, I still think Hutchinson will still pay wide with backup from Jackson and we'll go with Sarmeinto or Harness centrally. |  | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:41 - Mar 17 with 1617 views | BLUEBEAT |
It will be Omari.
Absolutely fine with that but lessens effect of impact substitutions that have been our forte. |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:15 - Mar 17 with 1440 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:41 - Mar 17 by BLUEBEAT |
It will be Omari.
Absolutely fine with that but lessens effect of impact substitutions that have been our forte. |
Yes, closest match technically to Burns, but Omari has given KM a bit of a headache with his performance yesterday in the Chappers role, without the Burns injury, I'd be thinking Chappers might have a spell on the bench. |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:15 - Mar 17 with 1439 views | bluelagos |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:27 - Mar 17 by norfsufblue |
We have in my opinion 4 players that can a job down that right side all of whom bring different qualities... Jezza, Omari, Jacko, and not forgetting Clarkey.........
I'm sure KM will be able to do something with that lot and he's got them all on the training pitch for about a fortnight. [Post edited 17 Mar 11:29]
|
Some quality nicknames there, surely Omari has earned the right to one too. Hutcho, Hutchy...needs something, maybe just Hutch? |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:17 - Mar 17 with 1423 views | tonybied |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:15 - Mar 17 by bluelagos |
Some quality nicknames there, surely Omari has earned the right to one too. Hutcho, Hutchy...needs something, maybe just Hutch? |
Mari? | | | |
| It's a massive loss and really affects our (outside) chance of autos on 12:21 - Mar 17 with 1382 views | Dyland |
The threat he poses wide down that side opens up the central areas more than when Omari is there. Having both as options on the right especially during a game has been invaluable. Kayden can do a job of course (great cross for the goal yesterday e.g. and the usual graft), and scares the life out of defenders with his pace, but he has nowhere near the same ability on the ball as Wes. |  |
| |
| It's a massive loss and really affects our (outside) chance of autos on 12:25 - Mar 17 with 1338 views | SomethingBlue |
| It's a massive loss and really affects our (outside) chance of autos on 12:21 - Mar 17 by Dyland |
The threat he poses wide down that side opens up the central areas more than when Omari is there. Having both as options on the right especially during a game has been invaluable. Kayden can do a job of course (great cross for the goal yesterday e.g. and the usual graft), and scares the life out of defenders with his pace, but he has nowhere near the same ability on the ball as Wes. |
Yep, I'm with you to be honest, we'll have to get real and accept it is a really big blow. | |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:26 - Mar 17 with 1314 views | FrimleyBlue |
We can if KM sets the right side up the best way.
For me. Jackson and Tuenzebe works as Jackson gives tuenzebe and out ball over the top to chase if needed. Tuenzebe has the defensive mindset to counter Jacksons weakness of defending.
I think if we see Hutchinson on the right.. then we see clarke at RB as clarke can make more overlaps to enable hutch in invert more. |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:28 - Mar 17 with 1301 views | norfsufblue |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:15 - Mar 17 by bluelagos |
Some quality nicknames there, surely Omari has earned the right to one too. Hutcho, Hutchy...needs something, maybe just Hutch? |
Starsky! | | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:47 - Mar 17 with 1235 views | Dubtractor |
No getting away from fact that Burns will be a huge loss, and I think we generally play our best football with him in the team, but I take comfort from the fact that we've got a few options for how to set up that AM 3 and still have bench impact players too. |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:52 - Mar 17 with 1207 views | franz_tyson |
Horses for courses. Jacko if we need speed/ workrate and maybe the best Wes like-for-like or its Hutch. Not sure about Sarmiento or Harness down the right-hand side. Maybe for 15-20 mins from the subs bench, but not sure they're starters.
I think Hutch will be carrying most of the load down that right-hand side if Wes is out for a while. | | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 12:54 - Mar 17 with 1177 views | TractorWood |
I really like Burns. He's unplayable at best and generally has been key to most of our decent displays for us.
I guess the only critique you could have is his consistency and seemingly streaky nature of his form. I guess if he was more consistent he'd be in the Prem..... |  |
| |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 13:03 - Mar 17 with 1103 views | Dennyx4 |
If the opposition play a high line, similar to Wednesday & Bristol City, Jackson suits the role perfectly.
If however the opposition sit deep, the Jackson option doesn’t really work.
Hopefully Wes isn’t too bad, but can see us mix it up a bit with Jackson and Omari, depending on how the opposition play.
I do believe we need pace in the team, as a lot of teams have pushed up against us recently, due to not wanting an aerial battle with Moore in the penalty area. This was the case v Bristol City, and we only really unlocked them, when Burns came on. |  | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 13:06 - Mar 17 with 1077 views | stonojnr |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 by JakeITFC |
Jackson was brilliant yesterday, his usual busy and tireless self but with some moments of real quality - a couple of great first touches from aerial balls and some really good crosses.
The game suited him and we looked for that ball in behind for him quite often which they never really dealt with, and I think we are a better team when we have that vertical threat (the Bristol City game (pre-Burns sub) especially showed how to stop us a bit by squeezing the field when we don’t have that direct runner in that position to get the defence turned around). An objectively better front four probably contains Hutchinson, Chaplin and Broadhead from the start but I think we will see Jackson start a few of our closing fixtures if Burns is a season ender. |
agreed I think Jackson played in that role superbly yesterday, and Hutchinson has progressed beyond being simply the supersub Burns replacement.
though hopefully Burns injury isnt as serious as they fear, see what the scans say of course, but it didnt look like Hirsts style of hamstring injury,and I thought they were treating Burns foot/ankle on the pitch | | | |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 13:23 - Mar 17 with 1010 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Do we cope ok without Burns? on 11:28 - Mar 17 by Nutkins_Return |
No. Can he play in that position. To a degree. Can he offer anything like what Burns does. Absolutely not.
We can cope without Burns for individual games and get results. Will it effect us over 8 games. Yes. Someone has to step up and not just as a starter, our finishers are so important. It will most likely be Hutch from.tjenstart with Jackson off the bench (but I do expect McKenna to start Jackson occasionally from a tactical perspective and keep Hutch fresh.
Humphreys may get some opportunity off the bench for Chappers. Think he can do that 10 role in 20 min cameos. Sarmiento and Harness the more obvious choices. Taylor could do a job but I don't see him as a 10 at all other than a threat 25 yards out. |
Could be Taylor of Humphries. |  |
| |
| Weirdly I feel worse when we are second than third on 13:36 - Mar 17 with 950 views | Dyland |
| It's a massive loss and really affects our (outside) chance of autos on 12:25 - Mar 17 by SomethingBlue |
Yep, I'm with you to be honest, we'll have to get real and accept it is a really big blow. |
Confidence wise I mean. And I'm now rather ridiculously looking at the budgies' fixtures as much as ours, with this innate unshakeable fear they will spawn a way past us in the playoffs.
Fact is, with my big boy hat on, it's a dream season in terms of how we play and where we find ourselves. Whatever happens. Except the horror scenario described above of course. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
