LEFT BACK OPTIONS ?

I think Caddis could play at left back because he is good enough with the ball at his feet. I think if a player is good, it doesn't matter what side he is played on. I was always brought up to use both feet and i never went much past *. Professionals should all be proficient on their weak side. My fear with Caddis however is that because of his size, Gordy is trying to mould him into a winger. I don't like this. We have quite a few wingers and I don't think he is all that much better than them. But we are short on decent full backs, especially ones who can play the left. I'd much prefer to see us develop a young, fearless attacking fullback who has pace and poise on the ball. He has experience in playing defence so just keep adding to this and develop him further.

I also quite like the sound of Robson at the back purely to add a bit of dig in that area. My fear with him is that he's not the quickest and although he played a few games there for Dundee Utd, I don't know if he is good enough at tackling to play there. Agree through that he would've just broke cousan's leg and drop-kicked miller rather than just letting them be.

 

could caldwell be pushed to left back ?

hinkel mcmanus loovens caldwell

just wondering

 

why the * should we even have to have this thread! we should have a LB we are a CL football team that must look like a joke to the rest!

berbatov, teves, ronaldo and rooney are gonnae hump us... if rangers get 4 past us... * sake im no looking foward to this!

 

Luca for me

 

If we played a 3 5 2 Hartley could sit back as extra cover as we have used him as cover for lb before

 

Ive got a novel idea,why dont we play the only natural LB at the club,Naylor.

 

When McManus first broke in to the team (and correct me if I'm wrong) did he not come in as LB?? To my memory he did and he did a quite decent job. Willing to be corrected as it was a wee while ago.

 

mcmanus did good at leftback? didnt he start at leftback in the art media away game?

 

His first was shakthar away a few year ago was it not?

and if i remember right he was *, slow as *.

 

Ok my standing has been corrected - we're * at LB - lets play a 3-2-2-1-3 and just go for goals. If we score more than them we should be ok!

 

That's the only way unless we make do with the midfield the way it is and play Robson at LB where he played with Dundee United.

 

The midfield was overun on Sunday so we need more fight in there!

 

We shouldn't concede many goals with 3 keepers surely:icon_mrgreen:

 

disgusting that we've been reduced to discussing who would make the least bad left back. we've all known we need a decent LB for the past 2 years so why the * haven't we got one?

 

I'm on my fifth Stella (tough day at work) - well spotted ... that last 3 should be a 2

 

As has been said earlier,if Sunday proved anything,it showed that Robson should be starting in CM.A LB should have been signed,we didnt.Naylor is the best option.Wilson is never a LB,and thats the same for the other options suggested.

 

That's who i would go for, he is a * for coming back though, wgs will never play him....well not when it means something.

 

100% agree mate. Just weighing up the options.

 

that aint a bad idea anyway mate, i have always prefered 3 at the back to 4, so long as you have wide players who can track back then it should be fine even in europe, this is the team i would play if manager (i use this in fifa08)

gk- boruc

cb- wilson
cb-mcmanus
cb-loovens/caldwell/caddis

ml- McGeady
dm-hartley
dm-robson
am-brown
mr-nakamura

sr-JVOH
sl-McDonald

subs
maloney
sammy
o'dea
miller
doumbe