Author Topic: Triniwings match report..Warriors warm my heart:) (Read 9238 times)

palos · « **Reply #30 on:** May 19, 2005, 06:29:57 PM »

Men go cuss meh but ah go say it again.

From a purely "physical tools" standpoint....Cyd Gray have de makings of a proper right wing back.

He fit

He fast

He have recovery speed

He will tackle yuh

He will overlap & put pressah on de opposin winger to defend him

He eh de worse crosser of de ball in de world

HOWEVER

Cyd positional play is a challenge to say de least

He football elevator doh go to de top floor

He wild

He prone to red card because of de wileness.

THEREFORE

IF he is coachable.....he could be an asset...at least as a sub.

The problem is for this team, we're VERY WEAK on the left side because of a lack of natural left sided players.

real madness · « **Reply #31 on:** May 19, 2005, 08:22:12 PM »

Quote from: andre samuel on May 19, 2005, 06:02:36 PM

Quote
We specialising in slow defenders. Anton slow as well and almost everybody else. It looks like Rojas is the best option at this point.
Quote

u really have de right handle because u talking real madness! rojas is a poor player at this level! i would put nigel daniel (who also had a poor game against north east stars) in de team before him!

Rojas is a poor defensive marker, and is very obvious with his one foot ability! he cyar kick with he left foot tuh save he life. He cannot make that team, if he does, every team in de hex will kill we on de right!

I am not saying Rojas is a good choice, but the sad thing is we dont have much to choose from. Personally I don't like him as a player but the question is who can replace him. I believe the only other option is Nigel Daniel ( I can't really comment much on him because I have not seen him play a lot) and he got a lot of negative reviews for his performance against NE Stars. So back to my original question who are good candidates for the left back position?

dcs · « **Reply #32 on:** May 19, 2005, 08:40:11 PM »

We bound to have a weaker player at some position.
Is up to the other players to cover for them and help them out.
Avery need to school Rojas, having a few games on the left side of defense might be good(not necessarily WCQs)...whether is Daniel or Rojas.

Unless we skip that whole thing and just go with 3 in the back....at least for Panama.

Allyuh feel we safe with Dog as the central def with just 3 backs?

triniwings · « **Reply #33 on:** May 19, 2005, 09:26:56 PM »

I share your view dcs, but to be honest although Dog is an experienced and well established campaigner, I would rather Dennis in dee middle than Dog. I am no fan of Lawrence at all, but he wins headers just like Dog because of height, and he covers a lot of ground a lot faster. Dennis is also a bit more comfortable with the ball at his feet. That is why we were able to play the ball in the back so comfortably, all those defenders are comfortable with the ball at their feet. With Dog in the center, any time he receives, yuh know nothing constructive could be created because he will be instructed to boom kick it up to a striker.

triniwings · « **Reply #34 on:** May 19, 2005, 09:33:18 PM »

Let us all remember to distinguish between the capabilities of a left-sided player and an international left wing back. That is a specialist position in the true sense of the word. Sadly, we do not have many options, Rojas is defintely not our best, but who else do we have who can consistently perform the role. 8/10 times Rojaas will get the job done and he is accustomed to the position now. Also, because we do not have lengthy periods of time for these guys to build cohesion and train togther, as Rojas and Tiger train togther on that left side for RSL, why not use that to our advantage. He is not the best, but we have to stick with him. What other choice do we have?

arrow · « **Reply #35 on:** May 19, 2005, 09:37:40 PM »

Quote from: triniwings on May 19, 2005, 09:26:56 PM

I share your view dcs, but to be honest although Dog is an experienced and well established campaigner, I would rather Dennis in dee middle than Dog.

Dog plays for Glasgow Rangers, Lawrence for Wrexham. Nuff said.

triniwings · « **Reply #36 on:** May 19, 2005, 09:47:23 PM »

hehehe..aight arrow.....ah hear ya...but I just raised the point because of their recent performances with the national team and their strengths and weaknesses.

dcs · « **Reply #37 on:** May 19, 2005, 10:11:25 PM »

Beenie Man will make room for Dog once he back in time for some training.
I hope he reaching back in time for El Salvador....dat knee boy....it like a time bomb.
And we go be asking him to continue playing hard in the coming games after a hectic and full season.

Dennis will be needed. I just glad betwee the two of them they put T&T as a top priority.
Fuentes had some jokey picture of de giraffe running dem agility exercise though the cones.

real madness · « **Reply #38 on:** May 19, 2005, 10:21:48 PM »

Quote from: triniwings on May 19, 2005, 09:33:18 PM

Let us all remember to distinguish between the capabilities of a left-sided player and an international left wing back. That is a specialist position in the true sense of the word. Sadly, we do not have many options, Rojas is defintely not our best, but who else do we have who can consistently perform the role. 8/10 times Rojaas will get the job done and he is accustomed to the position now. Also, because we do not have lengthy periods of time for these guys to build cohesion and train togther, as Rojas and Tiger train togther on that left side for RSL, why not use that to our advantage. He is not the best, but we have to stick with him. What other choice do we have?

You have a valid point. Since Rojas and Tiger play club football together, that might work to our advantage.

Touches · « **Reply #39 on:** May 19, 2005, 10:56:29 PM »

TRINIWINGS,

I feel we go have to agree to disagree.

You prefer Lawrence to Dog

and you feel Rojas is the best we have at left back.

breds yuh lorse some stripes from me there.

Left back we have Avery, Nigel Daniel, Sancho play there already, I would even put Tiger and yes even Cyd Grey before Rojas.

We have a player called Rickey Shakes who plays left back for Bolton........I ent know why we ent suss him out yet.

ALso I feel we could try Jones there as he played defence in the under 20 team and went to Southampton as a defender.

Also yuh ent really need a left foot to play left back, as a pro you must have some level of competence with that foot, and when yuh beat and make the overlap runs you drag back the man and cross with the right. Also if you cut in you hit with the right foot if you shooting to goal.

Long time wing backs used to be the slowest and shortest men on the field..........now they have evolved to quick sprint and skillful.ala ashley cole.

We could convert someone or groom them for long term but as of right now put Avery and slot in DOg in the center.

ALyuh cant bad talk Dog..he is a force to be reckoned with.

Last thing.....a certain coach with a big moustache said that the Wrexham players were not good enough or skilfull enough to make his side. I agree with that assessment of two of them.

palos · « **Reply #40 on:** May 19, 2005, 11:06:08 PM »

De ideal solution fuh de leff back position is if Beenie could convince J Lloyd to come and play fuh we. He still eligible if ah not mistaken and England eh pickin he anytime soon. Not wit Ashley Cole and Bridge de men in possession.

He could rap wit Zamora too.

triniwings · « **Reply #41 on:** May 19, 2005, 11:17:40 PM »

touches, as I mentioned previously, I am no fan of Lawrence, and Dog is a more established central defender. I also said they should compete for that one spot. I just outlined their strengths and weaknesses. Of course I like Dog for dee middle. Its just that the last couple performances Dennis displayed were satisfactory not so? I also fraid for Dog and his knee:) It is too late to experiment with other wing backs right now, and Jloyd Samuel is a pipe dream. So that is my opinion, just as I respect yours. Remember we are not Brazil flooded with options. I was just saying let us go forth full force with what we have...what say u?

arrow · « **Reply #42 on:** May 20, 2005, 05:20:09 AM »

Quote from: Touches on May 19, 2005, 10:56:29 PM

We have a player called Rickey Shakes who plays left back for Bolton........I ent know why we ent suss him out yet.

Touches I think you put some false info about Shakes there. He has been playing as a striker and had only a couple appearances for Bolton over the past couple years and just got released. He finished the season on loan with Bury in League 2 and may be joining Swindon in League 1. Triniman could tell you more bout he...I feel he in love with Shakes.

real madness · « **Reply #43 on:** May 20, 2005, 06:53:25 AM »

The problem with Avery is he does attack a lot. This was BSC reason was not selecting Avery in recent times. So he may not be the best solution at left back if the coach wants someone to overlap a lot but from a totally defensive standpoint he is the best option.

samo · « **Reply #44 on:** May 20, 2005, 07:25:16 AM »

Avery attacks alot??? I have yet to see him cross halfline for the year... Dog is a better option than Lawrence, while Lawrence may be more comfortable with the ball at his feet, he does still give men heart attack, I rather Dog just boots the ball up... Also on corner kicks I think DOg is more likely to score than Lawrence... Ah feel Dog will score against Panama...

jusme · « **Reply #45 on:** May 20, 2005, 07:41:54 AM »

If we playing a 4 man defence I would put Dog in the middle. If we going with 3 at the back I would have to take the grasshopper. someone else was quick to correct to point out that he is much more comfortable with the ball at his feet, and to my eye he seems to cover ground faster.

you can't just say that the man from glasgow rangers go be superior to the man from wrexham regardless of the role you want them to play. Rangers could afford to have him in the defence because it have a stopper playing alongside him compensating for his weaknesses i.e. awkwardness on the ball, weak passing. If we put him back there by himself we immediately remove all margin for error.

Trini _2026 · « **Reply #46 on:** May 20, 2005, 07:50:11 AM »

OK arrow ricky shaks is a ulitily player like kenwyne jones .At bolton he played as striker right wing and right back.but the have him listed as a striker.At swindon in a match report he played an attacking midfielder .

as far as i see jones it should play midfield he can develop into a frank lampard

triniwings · « **Reply #47 on:** May 20, 2005, 09:50:05 AM »

yes jusme, that was me who said that Lawrence more comfortable with the ball at his feet and covers ground faster. All I was doing was pointing out their strengths and weaknesses. For the formation we are playing now with 2 centre backs and two wing backs, Lawrence is just as good as Dog for the reasons given above. But trust me, Dog eh no joke, he sturdy as hell in dee back ,and superb in dee air as well. I say let dem fight for dat one spot, wa ya say?

UPRISING · « **Reply #48 on:** May 20, 2005, 12:19:12 PM »

That 3-5-2 sound like the solution. Left back is critical critical position as most opposing teams will be strong on that side. Look at the 1st goal the US score in de oval...right side cross...Tiger (dais mih horse..must start) chook ah foot (loose marking on the right back) and Rojas nowhere to be found...wide open header...Shaka no chance ..Goal!

Since Tiger and Birchall seem to have the highest workrates in the midfield, this is the best 3-5-2 to go with..

Ince

Atiba Dog Avery

Edwards Birchall Tiger
Yorke Spann

Jones Stern

Subs: Glen for Stern (70), Nakhid for Spann (70) and maybe Sam/Daniel for Tiger.

We will see if Birchall work rate will help hold down the middle of the field and help distribute the ball out the back. Get Spann and Yorke moving forward attacking the defense. Tiger work rate will not require Avery to come forward and do what he does ...Mark and Bruise!

If Stern en up to par den bring Nakhid for Stern, push Dwight up top..

All in all is good to see that we have options, we really need to start developing the younger players to U20/U23 so that we have a bigger pool of international caliber players. I hate to say it but look at the US now to the US 15 years ago. They picking from about 75 players, we have about 30 international caliber ballers.

real madness · « **Reply #49 on:** May 20, 2005, 02:05:18 PM »

Quote from: samo on May 20, 2005, 07:25:16 AM

Avery attacks alot??? I have yet to see him cross halfline for the year... Dog is a better option than Lawrence, while Lawrence may be more comfortable with the ball at his feet, he does still give men heart attack, I rather Dog just boots the ball up... Also on corner kicks I think DOg is more likely to score than Lawrence... Ah feel Dog will score against Panama...

Hard luck dey..typo..meant to say does not attack a lot.