please answer question two.

[old and grey]

Question one; would we have won last nights game if we had started with the three up front that we finished the game with.
Answer; yes, almost certainly.
Questio two:why didn't we do it then.
Answer : ?????

 

[Hermann]

Question one; would we have won last nights game if we had started with the three up front that we finished the game with.
Answer; yes, almost certainly.
Questio two:why didn't we do it then.
Answer : ?????

That is not a certainty at all. We can never know what would have happened and it is all just speculation. If we had started with 3 up front and lost then you would be asking why we didn't start with 2 up front.

 

[dommers]

It's posts like these which give Exeweb a bad name. To speculate what may have happened doesn't help answer. Everyone should realise that the whole game would have been different if we'd started with 3 up front.

If Stansfield had scored from 2 yards with 10 minutes to go or had we stopped the cross for the first goal or had more people turned up or had Harley bothered etc.... These could all have changed the game. Why concentrate on the 3 upfront?

 

[Kirtonville Grecian]

Because for some stupid reason Tisdale feels as though he has to play that HAS BEEN Marcus Stewart.

 

[shabbashaz]

You can't live any part of life on if's and maybe's

 

[Grecian_In_Exile]

Question one; would we have won last nights game if we had started with the three up front that we finished the game with.
Answer; yes, almost certainly.
Questio two:why didn't we do it then.
Answer : ?????

I have looked into my crystal balls; my god it was awful; Tis started with the 3 up front as you suggested; our midfield was over-run even more, and we conceeded 6 it ended up just as the Chesterfield game finished last season :-O

In answer to your 2nd part; my guess is (sorry my balls only work the once this cold weather a day) Tis picked the team he thought capable of winning last nights game; the fact that there were many under par performances sadly put pay to those tactics?

 

[Benito]

Because for some stupid reason Tisdale feels as though he has to play that HAS BEEN Marcus Stewart.

Who has been one of our top performers in recent weeks.

Silly, billy.

 

[Gussy]

....because we were playing hoofball and hoping one of our players may get to the ball!!

 

[old and grey]

Well, all i can say
is that everybody in the doble near me agreed with me that long high balls to Stans is a hit and hope tactic, especially when his partner up front is too slow to keep up with him.Surely second half proved that at home a more attacking formation including some height made us look menacing in the box, proved by two goals.
However, i take what Dommers says.We really must not speculate on Exeweb.It gives us a bad name.Please no speculation on the following, probable result of Saturdays game, whether we shall sell Harley or not, whether we will sign a defender, in fact don't post anything on Exeweb.How stupid can you be!!!.

 

[dommers]

is that everybody in the doble near me agreed with me that long high balls to Stans is a hit and hope tactic, especially when his partner up front is too slow to keep up with him.

Yet everyone near me wanted us to pump the ball it the box at the earliest opportunity in the first half.