The sooner we play a single striker,the sooner we will score

[michael]

The sooner we play a single striker at home-with 5 midfield players-3 centrally- the sooner we will start to dominate and score.

 

Less is More

[P.W.]

Actually (at least in the first half) we dominated and made plenty of chances - we so nearly scored quite a few times. The problem, as I saw it, was we went in at half time & half the team didn't come out. Can we spend half-time on the pitch?

Edited October 8, 2011 by PeterW

[Dutch_Mike]

I'd love to know what you base this on Michael. We couldn't have created anymore chances in that first half yesterday if we'd tried, regardless of how many strikers we played. A bit of luck, or a competent referee who should've spotted two stone-wall penalties, and we would've been at least two-nil up (if not more) at half time. Then the second half becomes a different game entirely. Sometimes you have to accept that in football, it's just not your day at times. With that starting XI (didn't look half as effective without Kwesi), we will score goals.

[Coffin Ender]

You need to score 70-odd goals at least to have a successful season (none of the top nine sides last season scored fewer than 66 in the league). This means that your single striker would have to be capable of scoring 30-plus goals with two midfielders contributing a minimum of 10 apiece with everyone else chipping in as well. In particular I don't see us as having goalscoring midfielders so we would struggle to score enough. As was mentioned to me on Tuesday, the players we have seem best suited to CK's old 5-3-2 formation.