condor Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Bamford Bamford was brought in on loan and played on the wing despite being a striker. 4-3-3 worked and so he either had the choice of being Martins understudy or playing as a pseudo winger. For all the negative things people had to say about Bamford he still scored 10 goals in under half a season. I also recognise that he did score these goals not playing as a striker, (Although 3 of the goals were as an impact sub when Martin had been taken off) Bent Similar circumstances, striker brought in on loan in January. Like Bamford we have got Bent in to be an understudy to Martin (As long as we play 4-4-3) I. didn't understand the poll where we had to choose between Ward or Dawkins or Bent, does the poster know something I don't? Are we switch to 4-4-2 or playing Bent as a winger? Bizarre choices... Conjecture: 1. Maybe McClaren signed Bent with a 4-4-2 in mind, either as a new possible formation or as a half time tactic when things aren't working? 2. Maybe McClaren hasn't learned from Bamford, and still insists playing strikers as wingers as he did with Bamford. Maybe he thinks Bent (Who was a winger in his early days) could offer something as a winger in a 4-4-3) 3. Maybe McClaren signed him just to be an understudy to Martin/Impact sub in a 4-3-3? Option number 1 is possible, personally I think 4-4-3 works, so we don't need to start messing with things, Option number 2 is cynical. Option number 3 is also possible. Personally I think it's a mixture of option 1 and 3. McClaren knows best though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i-Ram Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I am not sure Bent can play out wide or indeed play like Martin as the target man/pivot. My son watched a lot of him at Fulham where he thinks he was misused. He is a goal poacher, and is at his most effective on the shoulder of the last defender - if you are going to use Bent to his most effective, you need him in and around the penalty box all of the time. The truth is probably the same of Bamford, but he still has lots to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilsonram12 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Bent is most definatly not a winger, he's a striker and has played that loan role up front for a lot of team, was pivotal for Sunderland a couple of seasons back, if we can get that darren bent we'll have the best striker in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
condor Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 Bent is most definatly not a winger, he's a striker and has played that loan role up front for a lot of team, was pivotal for Sunderland a couple of seasons back, if we can get that darren bent we'll have the best striker in the league Neither was Bamford though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramslad1992 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 4-4-3 is a good formation... Always good to have 12 men! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilsonram12 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Neither was Bamford though. Bamford is/was unproven, bent is a proven striker capped by England Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagerbob Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I do like the 4-4-3 formation for the 95th minute. Any earlier though and the not having anyone in goal worries me a little bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddesdenRam Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Bent can't play out wide in a 433 so no he isn't Bamford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
condor Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 Bent can't play out wide in a 433 so no he isn't Bamford He played out wide today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Bamford was successful. If we are going to play Bent out wide then why is he here. Bennett should have come on today. This is SM weak spot. If Bent is going to play then it should either be instead of Martin or we switch to a 4-4-2 and drop the DM. If not, don't play him. It's that simple. We may have lost Ibe, but Ward is back and he was on fire before he got injured. He is a much better all round player who doesn't go missing for large parts of the game. While Bennett is also back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
condor Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 Bamford was successful. If we are going to play Bent out wide then why is he here. Bennett should have come on today. This is SM weak spot. If Bent is going to play then it should either be instead of Martin or we switch to a 4-4-2 and drop the DM. If not, don't play him. It's that simple. We may have lost Ibe, but Ward is back and he was on fire before he got injured. He is a much better all round player who doesn't go missing for large parts of the game. While Bennett is also back. THIS. Don't see the logic in playing Bent as a winger, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddesdenRam Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 He played out wide today.[/quote I think most will agree he looked lost though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
condor Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 Bent can't play out wide in a 433 so no he isn't Bamford Surely history is repeating itself though if Bent played on the wing today as Bamford did for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramarena Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Not his ideal position but who didn't look lost in that 2nd half. Imaging coming on with no service and the team playing so badly. He didn't stand a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
condor Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 Not his ideal position but who didn't look lost in that 2nd half. Imaging coming on with no service and the team playing so badly. He didn't stand a chance. Agree. Either switch to a formation with 2 strikers or take Martin off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddesdenRam Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Agree. Either switch to a formation with 2 strikers or take Martin off. Hence, Bent can't play out wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peakram Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Hoping he isn't the next Best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Just got in from the match. Saw one "nearly" through all in his general direction which rolled through to Doris i don't think i saw Bent touch the ball at all. And we only used 2 subs (one of which was enforced due to Hughes' injury). What happened to the brave Maclaren who last season made bold strokes when things weren't working (and quite obviously so). Why no Dawks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyHudson Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Why no Dawks? Wasn't on the bench due to "personal reasons". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Bent was gash today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.