Replies - In Chronological Order ( Show Newest Messages First)
gph
2:58 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
Probably the best choice if all our strikers are injured/suspended/in the African Cup of Nations.
|
i-Ron
2:59 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
Nah
|
Mr Anon
2:59 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
So solution to playing him out of position is to play him out of position?
|
gph
3:02 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
He's Mr Utility, so he'd probably make a good fist of it.
Out of curiosity, I'd like to see him as a striker, but out of wanting-West-Ham-to-win-games, I wouldn't.
Same goes for him in goal.
|
goose
3:03 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
FFS no.
you clown.
|
Davenport
3:05 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
No
|
Johnson
3:07 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
AthleticoCK EasthamicoCK
|
Takashi Miike
3:07 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
no, I think he's worth more to us playing wide though the more I hear slaven talk on itv the more I think he'll continue using him as a right back/wing back. slav's mentioned a few times how he loves the full backs to get as far forward as possible. i think he's wasted in that position but id rather have him in the team than not
|
Davenport
3:07 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
Johnson 3:07 Fri Jun 17
|
the exile
3:08 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
I've been banging this drum for a couple of months. Think about it - he has shown beyond any doubt that he is a really good finisher; he's great in the air, two-footed, strong, and quick. The only drawback, and I'll admit it's a big one, is that he isn't used to playing as a central striker and I have no idea how long any possible "conversion" would take and therefore whether the management would consider it a chance worth taking. But I would love to see him given a couple of run-outs in the position, maybe in pre-season.
|
Grumpster
3:15 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
He could do a job there, but not the sort of job there that the likes of Lacazette could do, so I'd much rather have him on the right side of midfield ghosting in thanks.
|
gph
3:15 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
I don't think it's a totally stupid idea.
I can think of at least three of his goals which any striker would have been proud of.
Especially the one where he had his back to the goal, chested the ball down, turned and scored.
The strongest argument against it is that he is so good on the wing, not that he'd be useless as a striker.
|
gank
3:18 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
He should be on the bench. Great impact sub and versatile enough to fit in wherever needed. Proper workhorse but you can't get 90 minutes of consistency with his workrate so coming on to change a game will be better for us. I would hope we add a quality striker in the summer anyway and if we get a strong right back he would naturally be on the bench anyway.
|
boltkunt
3:20 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
This has to be one of the worst threads in recent WHO history.
You absolute fool.
|
Grumpster
3:22 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
Can't work out if Gank's fishing or not - I must be tired.
|
the exile
3:26 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
That's very helpful, Bolty. Do explain.
|
Athletico Easthamico
3:28 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
He played more as an inside forward for Forest and Wednesday than as a winger.
If we have to cover the right back spot then Byram/Tomkins/Norsveldt should be able to do it between them.
The bloke from Valenica will play out wide, Payet will drift in from wide positions and we are still been linked with wide players.
I don't think Antonio could play right up top but he could definetly play off someone like Caroll or Sakho.
We can still buy Lacarette or whoever but Antonio could save us millions if we are looking for 2 strikers.
|
goose
3:51 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
or he could cost us money because we've decided not to buy a second striker and rely on someone who's never played there and isnt a striker.
funny how none of the vastly experienced coaches/managers he has played for have thought of this before.
|
i-Ron
3:52 Fri Jun 17
Re: Should Antonio be played as a striker?
|
I don't think Gank is far off with what he said.
Feghouli is a right winger, Bilic said he prefers Payet on the left the other day, and he's always going on about Lanzini being a Modric type player...
Tore comes in and that leaves Antonio as right back or impact sub.
|
| 
