|
Post by lomax on Aug 25, 2010 15:35:57 GMT
Deemed by many as nowhere near good enough, it now seems he is a regular fixture of Fordy's plans, having starting the last two games and featuring in the first two from the bench.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you think the lad is back to the old Faulks we saw a couple of seasons back, or is it a sign that the squad is too thin?
|
|
|
Post by Rijs on Aug 25, 2010 15:46:49 GMT
He was not on the pace last night. Personally I don't think he's quick enough for this level, though he is strong and prepared to have a go.
|
|
|
Post by Ash on Aug 25, 2010 15:47:14 GMT
I think on his day Faulks is quality. But he doesn't seem to be on it as yet.
He said the other day after the Weymouth match that he wished he'd had a pre-season so that would explain why he's behind on sharpness. I think we need to keep with him as once he's sharp again he'll start banging in the goals.
I think generally we are a little thin up that end of the pitch at the moment. I think once Belly is back then he'll chip in with some goals and also when Pondy is fit again we'll have that scoring midfielder again. Lyonsy and Janesy are good hard working players who can play on the wing and up top but they were both missing last night, I would have expected Janesy to start instead of Beechers last night had he been available. Once he came on against Weymouth he put in a really good shift and caused the Weymouth defence a few issues.
I like the look of Holman, I think he just needs to get used to the game in this league and I think he'll prove useful.
|
|
|
Post by reaps on Aug 25, 2010 16:17:03 GMT
agreed, at the moment, apart from harding, we don't look like scoring, need a big target man
|
|
|
Post by lomax on Aug 26, 2010 10:12:34 GMT
On another point, I always enjoyed coming to City because I knew they had attacking creative midfield players that loved the ball into feet and running at defenders. Janeys and Lyon, then there was Pondy and Brooksy too. My worry was always that the manager never knew who was the better option. Now we've got Harding in, and have lost Brooks and Pond (to injury), it seems that we still have the problem of having to leave one out. As I've said in the other thread, I don;t think we've found a suitable replacement for Steele.
I'd like to see something like:
----------- Savage - Malone -------------- Janes ----------Harding-------------Lyon -------------------Sandy----------------------
Or in an ideal world, Fisher lone striker (still no word on what has happened with him?). The three behind the striker can switch around but most importantly one other needs to get into the box to support El.
Last season (and pre-season) we were playing strikers out wide, to support the target man, but this really doesn't work. They struggle with the ball into feet and the delivery is not a patch on Janes or Brooks. Three creative and attacking midfielders behind the striker is important. Sav & Malone will clear anything up in midfield.
This would also leave Beechers coming from the bench, if we need to push for a goal.
I know that many will curse the thought of playing one up top at this level, but it worked last season (granted we had a striker that was playing perhaps two leagues below where he should have been) and can work again with the right movement behind the front man.
|
|
|
Post by Ash on Aug 26, 2010 11:04:39 GMT
Last thing I heard on Fish was that he was coming back from injury and was able to stay with us for 5 weeks before heading back out to Spain to join up with the Glenn Hoddle Academy again.
|
|
|
Post by Padz on Sept 9, 2010 12:32:39 GMT
Gotta say that i thought Faulks was class last night playing at centre half alongside Kam Abassi in the Nomads side.
|
|
|
Post by lomax on Sept 9, 2010 13:37:12 GMT
How bizarre! Seen this is Belly's second match for the Nomads, any idea if there's any plans to get him involved in the first team squad soon?
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Sept 9, 2010 13:55:49 GMT
Perhaps following in Andy Baird's footsteps and moving from striker to central defender?? It may not be a permanent thing of course, but he certainly did an excellent job last night!
|
|
|
Post by Ash on Sept 9, 2010 15:29:07 GMT
I thought Faulks did a good job too. Did confuse me when Shep read out "Number 4, James Faulkner" and I just thought to myself that he's was just wearing the number 4 up front for some reason... Then to see him lining up alongside Kam, well, I had to look twice!
I thought Belly did alright last night but needs to keep going to get his fitness back, seemed a little on the back foot at times. But coming back from injury will do that.
|
|