If we don't find a left back - who in the squad could play there except Hume ?

Apologies. I should have said nobody then. Early days but McLaughlin looks poor in his natural position so moving him across to LB isn't the answer and O'Nein shouldn't be anywhere near starting as a left back.
when has conor mcloughlin played in his natural positon for safc?
he is a right back..been played as a right sided CB a couple of times..and a left back once..
 


If any single person has watched us these last 12 months and thinks Flanagan could perform well at full back I would question their sanity.
how would they know?
nigel clough played him as a full back to good effect..in a team that won promotion from this league..and said the lad is a full back..
 
how would they know?
nigel clough played him as a full back to good effect..in a team that won promotion from this league..and said the lad is a full back..
Tbh I thought Clough says that he moved him to full back after being promoted and had played him at CB during promotion season.
 
how would they know?
nigel clough played him as a full back to good effect..in a team that won promotion from this league..and said the lad is a full back..

Different managers have different perceptions of what players are. Partly because they have different requirements for what they want. Pullis' Stoke teams often had 4 big CBs right across the back-4 - two of them 'at fullback'. But then he didn't expect them to go forward much, and made the pitch as narrow possible to cramp opposition wingers. It worked.

In our most impressive run of games in the last 10 years, our RB was in fact a CB 'filling in' - Santiago Vergini. It didn't make him a full back.

Maybe Flanagan could be played at fullback, but ... he'd hardly be a good attacking one, whatever Clough may have said. And the fact that he's right footed is a disadvantage on the left.
 
I think Onien will play RB this season. In fact, that will be his SAFC career position. Left and right back positions in a 442 this season will be Onien McLoughlin Hume Flanagan and an other.

The prospect of Tinman Flanagan at full back terrifies me more than anything else in this world bar a return for Lee Camp in goal.
 
Different managers have different perceptions of what players are. Partly because they have different requirements for what they want. Pullis' Stoke teams often had 4 big CBs right across the back-4 - two of them 'at fullback'. But then he didn't expect them to go forward much, and made the pitch as narrow possible to cramp opposition wingers. It worked.

In our most impressive run of games in the last 10 years, our RB was in fact a CB 'filling in' - Santiago Vergini. It didn't make him a full back.

Maybe Flanagan could be played at fullback, but ... he'd hardly be a good attacking one, whatever Clough may have said. And the fact that he's right footed is a disadvantage on the left.
certainly flanagan would not be a "wing back" on either side no..

i trust cloughs judgement ahead of ross's
 
Hume will be fine at left back in a flat back 4 with McGeady in front of him. Forget which away game he started towards the end of last season but the commentators on radio 5 were raving about his performance.
 
when has conor mcloughlin played in his natural positon for safc?
he is a right back..been played as a right sided CB a couple of times..and a left back once..

That's the point I was trying to make. Play both as fullbacks, their natural position, and see how they get on. Ross' use of them as wing backs exposed them both as well as highlighting Flanagan's lack of spatial awareness. I get that his preferred formation is 3 centre backs and full/wingbacks but on the evidence of both 1st half performances so far this season, the players appear to be unable to fit into it. Play to their strengths and go back to basics with a flat back 4.
 

Back
Top