Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

As i said certainly not start wi a right back on the left. 2 up front at home sure dont bother me any, but Terry wasn't at the races,? joss seemed too deep, and what about replacing the injured dino with an attacking player? how is that remotely sensible?

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Don't wish to intrude on the coaching session, but have just watched the goals and the one thing that amazed me was how 'bright' it was. Have they put some 100 watt bulbs in the floodlights, or were they using night-vision cameras?

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Even though I agree he had a bad game there, you'd think the natural backup to a left back would be a right back? I'd be interested to hear who you'd have put at left back instead seeing as we don't have any in reserve?? Or should we just not play with a left back because we had none?

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Sorry but the blame for the defeat lies squarely with John Coleman.

Keeping his other left back a secret and choosing not to play him is just not on. That added to how he intentionally injured three our four starting defenders before kick off... then using his pea shooter to take out Dean during the game?! Urgh. I also thought the way he applied to the FA to make sure Matt Crooks received a fifth yellow card and consequential 1 match suspension was disgusting.

Change at the top needed.

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Personally i would have played conneely back, hes done it before.

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

The blame does lie there no question at all,its not about a change at the top, thats never been mentioned, but as yeh crave attention from some you think what yeh want shaker.:rolleyes:

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Right were getting somewhere here Cashy...Conneely as LB.

Now for the other 10 positions...

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

So now our only available dependable center mid is covering left back?

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

In the second half we had our first choice forward four playing and hardly got a sniff,so Wimbledon deserve credit.
Pearson can play left back and was our only option (unless dean played there)I just think we stood off them a little and they capitalised.
I thought before the game they would be open to pace behind their centre backs and was disappointed windass was played deeper.
Would have liked Kaid to have been involved as he's got genuine pace,and Barry can play right back,so there were options.
Must admit I was impressed with their centre mid,he ran the game in the second half and couldn't half get around for a 35 year old.
Hope we get a response on Saturday KTF

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

You must have watched him somewhere else Chris, he hasn't been given a decent run out mainly because he's not consistent. You could argue he's not consistent because he doesn't get a good run, Chicken & Egg, but he's the one who has to prove his consistency. He's a flair player, good on his day but not enough days, like most flair players. In League 2 that's difficult for somebody like Bruna, he would be better off in the higher leagues where you get to play a bit more football than thugball.

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Disagree, pierro could do the job also, but lets move to half time, dino is injured, no-ones addressed the fact that Bruna replaced him?is everyone afraid to criticize the messiah? the guy to my knowledge has NEVER played full back? hes an attacking midfield player, also at half time we were NOT losing, Connelly has also played defender, whilst hes been excellent this season in midfield, no-one was really setting the world alight tuesday night, so i can see other options than poor owd Bruna, Barry was also on the bench,he can defend also, It makes me puke the way some defend the defenseless,

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

To be fair Tuesday nights game was lost in the midfield where most games are decided Young Josh had a nightmare 1st, half against 35yrs, young Dannie Bulman ok others were below par including Matty but he has played on the left before and played ok, I IMHO think the big mistake of the night was playing Josh in a role which is alien to him and he says himself on Twitter he had a bad game hopefully lessons learned and we move on.

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Don't think we did too bad last season when Coley was forced to play Piero and Kal as defensive RB/LB due to injury, So why not try Bruna there?

Coley has admitted that maybe we aren't as good as he thought, Fair play for him trying to be attacking (Wimbledon had conceded 5 in the last game and 3 by HT in our game) than sit back and try to sneak a winner!

It cost us the game but id much rather us play attacking football, especially at home, Backfired on Tuesday but with the team we've got i'm sure we will win more than we lose playing like that at home!

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

Because we had options that had played defence before, is that so hard to grasp? I also prefer attacking footy at home, but yeh gotta cut yer cloth, dinos injury was a real disruption imho.

Re: The Wimbledon Match Thread.
 

That's how I saw it Andy,you could say it was a bold move playing him there and maybe on another day paid off,but for me he's a talented offensive player,but when we don't have the ball,sometimes switches off.
For me I would have moved pierro to fullback and give kaid a start with proccy starting (terry missing out) and sheilding:screening the back four,winning the second balls.
It's all about opinions and although it's a good debating topic,coley knows his players better than us.
Plymouth away on Saturday,then a game on Tuesday,did that have a bearing? As we died in the second half