Your choice for forward pairing

[mizer]

Assuming we are playing two up front who would you play? Many people say we are missing Miller just now but his goal scoring record is bowf. I would quite like to see McGhee playing Paton and Maguire up front from the start to see how they get on.

[minijc]

Miller and Paton or Mackie and Paton.

[dave_min]

I went with Miller and Paton.

[Sharpie]

I would go for a three of Aluko on the left, Paton in the middle and Maguire on the right. The flaw would be expecting Aluko and Maguire to do some defensive work. As in, would they actually do it?

[bilbobaggins]

I would go for a three of Aluko on the left, Paton in the middle and Maguire on the right. The flaw would be expecting Aluko and Maguire to do some defensive work. As in, would they actually do it?

 

I was typing that but with Pawlett on the right.

[19afc03]

Voted for McGuire & Paton.

Miller should put in the reserves.

 

STAND FREE!!

[Sharpie]

I was typing that but with Pawlett on the right.

 

That's a better idea in fact.

[Guest rocket debris]

Very tough question. The toughest. I have high hopes for Paton. He is one of the few reasons I pay money to watch fitba. I don't think he is an out and out striker and would expect him to do damage coming in from the left wing. In a 4-4-2, I see no room for Aluko in the fullness of time, as I see Paton and Aluko filling the same left side of the 4 although it's great to have competition for any places. Mulgrew is another who could be considered for the left side of the midfield but I digress.

 

Up front, the first name on my teamsheet would be Lee Miller. But if I had the authority to pen his name on the teamsheet, I would have the power to kick fuck out of him on the training ground and demand more from him.

 

Alongside Miller, I would buy another striker. If my boss's boss - cos my boss is a waste of space - the chairman doesn't give me money then I would have to compromise the 4-4-2 tactics that I wish to engage. I would play Mackie for the next game, and have Maguire on the bench. But as Mackie hasn't been good enough for 10 years and Maguire has much to prove that he's good enough for the first 11 and anyway he might be more useful as an attacking right side coming from the 4 across the middle, this means that neither fit into the role properly.

 

In which case, we're fucked because we can't get the fucking basics right. Square pegs in oblong pussy's.

 

Miller - A.N. Other

 

Paton - Kerr - Pawlett - A.N. Other

 

Mulgrew - Ifil - Diamond - Foster

 

A.N. Other

 

 

EDIT: Fyvie is a great prospect and not been forgotten about. Consi provides competition for Ifil. Grassi may develop into a competent LB and is already better than our top scorer (sic) defensively and I'm pretty sure apart from those mentioned, the rest are fillers e.g. Deek Young, Gary Mac. Wonder what happened to Crawford.

[bilbobaggins]

Interesting re Pawlett in centre mid. I dare say you always want your best players with as much time on the ball as possible.

 

 

[Stewart]

Could we not just use my current Football Manager formation?

 

                Langfield

Foster Diamond Considine Mulgrew

                  Kerr

Pawlett                        Aluko

            Fyvie Paton

              Miller

 

Sorted!

[Guest rocket debris]

Could we not just use my current Football Manager formation?

 

                Langfield

Foster Diamond Considine Mulgrew

                  Kerr

Pawlett                        Aluko

            Fyvie Paton

              Miller

 

Sorted!

Yup, best available from current squad in that formation with Ifil good competition for Consi and Maguire pushing Fyvie.

 

Would like a traditional 4-4-2 in due course with a decent new striker and a decent new midfielder though.

[BobbyBiscuit]

Interesting re Pawlett in centre mid. I dare say you always want your best players with as much time on the ball as possible.

 

I think I'd be tempted to have him there too.  At Ibrox this season he was in a more central position and he caused them all sorts of problems running from deep with the ball and it gives him the scope to link with the front men more than playing wide does. 

 

I said after Ibrox that Pawlett is the closest thing I've seen to a young Eoin Jess. The way he instantly knows where he's going with it, uses his body well to shield the ball and plays with his head up which can open the game up for us, I think it would almost be a waste to have him on the wing.

[Sandaldinho]

I've gone Miller and Paton

i think Paton could play off Miller quite well but tbh i think we could do with getting someone new in and getting rid of Miller, Mackie and Wright

 

Think Paton would play better running off so aomeone that holds the ball up well, and has a bit of experience

[baggy89]

I've gone for Mackie and Wright, on the basis that two negatives make a positive.

[Reekie_Red]

Paton and A N Other. Paton needs an intelligent player who can hold the ball up and play into space. He needs a player with the intelligence of someone like Scott Booth or Craig Brewster to act as a foil

[dickofthedons]

Went for Miller and Paton. I remember saying last week that I'd like to see Miller and Mackie again after the Hearts game (dunno how drunk I was when I said it) but they've had how much years together without much success. I agree we need someone new to partner Paton, Miller would be perfect if he played to his potential but........

[tsr]

Paton and A N Other. Paton needs an intelligent player who can hold the ball up and play into space. He needs a player with the intelligence of someone like Scott Booth or Craig Brewster to act as a foil

 

Feel that your answer within the current squad is Miller.

 

I don't agree that Paton offers anything on the left, to often he's out of the game bar the occasional glimpse of quality that he undoubtedly has. Its a big season for him, I think he has to offer more than he currently is.

[scotfree]

Miller and Paton

[manc_don]

Miller and Paton

 

My choice pairing as well. But that all hinges on the Miller of 12 months ago is playing. Otherwise A N Other please.

[DerBomber]

I opted for Maguire and Paton.

I would like to see what these two could when played up top with one another. Maguire shows flashes of what he can do and an extended run in the team may make these flashes more frequent. I also feel Paton is slightly wasted on the left and would be better employed as a striker to see what he can do there. We have tried most other partnerships and they have failed so that is another reason.

 

On Paton I feel a partnership with Miller would almost be counter productive as his strike rate is so low it would put a burden on young Patons shoulders to score almost every game and I would not like to see him burdened with that at such a delicate time in his career.

[Kowalski]

Where's the option for "None of the bastards"?

 

Christ, have we ever had such a poor selection of "strikers" at the club! 

[BobbyBiscuit]

Where's the option for "None of the bastards"?

 

Christ, have we ever had such a poor selection of "strikers" at the club! 

 

I'm sure it's a rhetorical question but Mackie, Mike, D'Jaffo, Derek Young and Michie was a pretty hellish set of "strikers".

[Sandaldinho]

Maguire shows flashes of what he can do and an extended run in the team may make these flashes more frequent.

 

i'd like to see him go on loan for that very reason. i think he has great potential but i think he really needs the experience and i'm not convinced that he's going to get it at Aberdeen .

 

still like him as a player

[capitalsharpie]

Thing with this is though, does a pairing like this not have to be  given time ie 5 or six games in which to be judged, of which we, as supporters are unlikely to give them, such is our perogative?

[mizer]

Thing with this is though, does a pairing like this not have to be  given time ie 5 or six games in which to be judged, of which we, as supporters are unlikely to give them, such is our perogative?

 

With our rate of injuries and red cards I doubt we could string two games together!