I'm with Rog on this, why play creative Midfielder's when so far this season
all we have played is "hoof ball"!

 

I'll go with the 604  line up.

 

2 - 1 to the Wolves against West Ham. 5 straight losses and Mick would be
close to being out of a job. I don't think MM will let this happen. A dour
defensive game next me thinks.

 

Paul Crowe

Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

 

ConTech (Sydney Office)

 

PO Box 3517

Rhodes Waterside

Rhodes NSW  2138

Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542

Mob: 0406009562

Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com

Website: www.contechengineering.com

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 7 October 2010 10:18 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [BTMO] Trouble [sec=unclassified]

 

Last time I checked Thick Mick refused to play our 'only' creative
midfielder, Milijas, so the chances of us ever playing 2 creative
midfielders is absolutely zero, because we don't have two in our entire
squad.  If you're looking for hard work and graft, then Mick reckons we've
got that in spades.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 7 October 2010 9:57 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [BTMO] Trouble [sec=unclassified]

 

I picked this as it's the closest formation and team to the one that beat
West Ham 3-1 last season.  451 works fine, especially if there are two
"creative midfielders"

442 hasn't worked for us at all this season and it's widely regarded to have
no place in modern football so I can't understand why so many people demand
it, even if it's dressed up as 4132



On 7 October 2010 09:51, Marcus Chantry <marcus.chan...@macquarie.com>
wrote:

Can we please drop Edwards and put SEB up front.  A nice simple 4-1-3-2
formation.  If we don't go in with an attacking game plan against West Ham
then we can forget staying up.

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 7 October 2010 9:49 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com


Subject: Re: [BTMO] Trouble [sec=unclassified]

 

Hard choice for West Ham:



--------------------Hahnemann-----------------------------
Foley-----Craddock------Berra---Big Gay George
------------------------Mancienne--------------------------
Edwards-----Jones------------Miljas------------Jarvis
--------------------------Doyle--------------------------------

On 7 October 2010 09:07, Marcus Chantry <marcus.chan...@macquarie.com>
wrote:

Same old, same old Lee.

 

Thick Mick picks his favourites irrespective of whether or not they are in
form or even playing in their natural positions.

 

Hahneman is out of form and doesn't look the same commanding player he was
last season.

Craddock is another 5 yards off the pace compared to last year

Berra wants to join a hugging commune

Jarvis has forgotten how to cross

Ward can't see past the end of his nose

Doyle wants to be a one-man-show

 

The rest are just sh1te.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 7 October 2010 9:03 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [BTMO] Trouble [sec=unclassified]

 

Guidiera out long term, Hunt and Kightly not ready, Edwards being picked,
Henry suspended and now Jean Claude wants out......we are in trouble chaps.

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out!

The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this
email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not guarantee
the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions
expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of
Macquarie.

 

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out!

 

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out!

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out!

 

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out!

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out!

-- 
Boo!  Thick Mick Out!

Reply via email to