Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Match Thread: Cambridge United v Charlton Athletic | Tuesday 19 April

1235714

Comments

  • Bring on Harness.
  • edited April 2022
    Mmm..How's Liverpool V Manure doing... B)

  • 30' - Despite MacGillivray spilling the following corner, the visitors are able to eventually clear.
  • JamesSeed said:
    We seem to be half asleep. 
    Well we started very sharp on Friday and ended up losing. So this is extremely encouraging 
  • How's Liverpool V Manure doing... B)
    Honestly .............. no I must not tell
  • Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
  • Pearce scared me then. I thought he was going to take the guy out and give away a penalty 
    If he got closer he might've done.
  • This will be a shock to many but the Liverpool match just about shades this one in terms of quality. Although saying that, Man U wouldn't look out of place in our game
    1. 32'

      Post update

      Hand ball by Sean Clare (Charlton Athletic).

    2. 32'

      Post update

      Jack Lankester (Cambridge United) wins a free kick in the defensive half.

  • Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    No. Try again
     
    I was saying that we were told that we can't go to 442 as we would be over run in midfield. But playing 3 in midfield isnt working either.

    Maybe try 4 or 5......
  • Sponsored links:


    1. 33'

      Post update

      Alex Gilbey (Charlton Athletic) wins a free kick in the defensive half.

    2. 33'

      Post update

      Foul by Liam O'Neil (Cambridge United).

    1. 34'

      Post update

      Jayden Stockley (Charlton Athletic) wins a free kick on the left wing.

    2. 34'

      Post update

      Foul by Jubril Okedina (Cambridge United).

  • Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    Also 442 means 4 in midfield. Or arent wingers/wide players allowed to move. Perhaps in netball or subuteo they dont. 

  • 35' Dobson booked for a foul on Tracey. #camutd 0 #cafc 0
  • Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    No. Try again
     
    I was saying that we were told that we can't go to 442 as we would be over run in midfield. But playing 3 in midfield isnt working either.

    Maybe try 4 or 5......
    What formation do you suggest? 
  • Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    Also 442 means 4 in midfield. Or arent wingers/wide players allowed to move. Perhaps in netball or subuteo they dont. 
    We definitely have a subuteo goalkeeper!!
  • Cafc43v3r said:
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    No. Try again
     
    I was saying that we were told that we can't go to 442 as we would be over run in midfield. But playing 3 in midfield isnt working either.

    Maybe try 4 or 5......
    What formation do you suggest? 
    11.0.0 in front of the goal
    1. 36'

      Post update

      Corner, Cambridge United. Conceded by Jayden Stockley.

  • This will be a shock to many but the Liverpool match just about shades this one in terms of quality. Although saying that, Man U wouldn't look out of place in our game
    Would love to be reading GolfRedDevil’s posts on ManUre Life tonight :-) 
  • paulfox said:
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    Also 442 means 4 in midfield. Or arent wingers/wide players allowed to move. Perhaps in netball or subuteo they dont. 
    We definitely have a subuteo goalkeeper!!
    A Subbuteo goalkeeper is more likely to come off his line.

    And his throwing would be better, too.
  • Sponsored links:


  • This will be a shock to many but the Liverpool match just about shades this one in terms of quality. Although saying that, Man U wouldn't look out of place in our game
    Would love to be reading GolfRedDevil’s posts on ManUre Life tonight :-) 
    I am listening to Clinton Morrison on SSN on this game. Still cannot stand this man
    1. 38'

      Post update

      Attempt missed. Jayden Stockley (Charlton Athletic) header from very close range misses to the left. Assisted by Albie Morgan with a cross.

    1. 40'

      Post update

      Attempt blocked. Wes Hoolahan (Cambridge United) left footed shot from outside the box is blocked.

  • Cafc43v3r said:
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    No. Try again
     
    I was saying that we were told that we can't go to 442 as we would be over run in midfield. But playing 3 in midfield isnt working either.

    Maybe try 4 or 5......
    What formation do you suggest? 
    I dont think it's the formation that's the problem. Moreso the players & the manager. 
  • 49 year old Wes hoolahan breezed through our midfield there. Beautiful stuff. 
  • ross1 said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    4231 causing us problems .. out numbered in mid 
    I thought we keep being told we can't play 442 as the midfield will be ripped to shreds. So wingbacks aren't the answer either then. 
    What you on about.. Nobody is playing 442. Both teams have 3 midfielders
    I was making the point that posters on here are wanting to go back to 442 but it being pointed out that going back to the "old" system wouldn't work as the midfield would be over run.....but it seems  that we are being overrun playing with wingbacks. 

    Jeez......not hard to see what I was saying. 
    So you're saying that if we're getting overrun with a 3-man midfield... then we should try a 2-man. 

    I can see why I was confused. 
    No. Try again
     
    I was saying that we were told that we can't go to 442 as we would be over run in midfield. But playing 3 in midfield isnt working either.

    Maybe try 4 or 5......
    What formation do you suggest? 
    11.0.0 in front of the goal
    Nah you need to fit in the 8 nippy strikers somewhere. 

  • 42' Closing in at the break. Still nothing to separate the sides... #camutd 0 #cafc 0
  • So how’s it going now we’ve got our most potent strike force playing, tuning up for next season I hope👍


  • Not a shirt pull surely?  :)
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!