28 May 2016 08:02:55
Oops, sent that by mistake ed!
Will Rodgers want someone who works more with the midfield to build the play. If he goes with Roberts as one of a 3 he may also push Griffiths left and play a proper centre forward to bring other players into play.
I'm just thinking if the wee man might need to change how he plays a bit. Glad we can speculate on things while actually looking forward to a season!
28 May 2016 09:57:32
If griffiths was too be moved out wide (which is insane btw considering he just scored 40 goals) then he must play on the right cutting in, as he is way more of a threat than Roberts who I think has a lot to learn.
28 May 2016 10:12:42
I agree about him getting moved wide not being great, just a thought though as he very rarely brings anyone else into the game, Rodgers might not be a fan of that. Griffiths also has a lot to learn.
28 May 2016 10:37:57
How many goals would a proper forward score? as opposed to the griffiths who isn't playing right.?
28 May 2016 12:44:46
Well he's scored 40 goals in the SPL. How many did Kris Boyd score. Griffiths hasn't proved it in Europe. He's surprised me because he's better than I thought he was, and some of the headers he's scored this year have been incredible, he's still far from the complete striker though. We've got absolutely no options up front, so we don't know how he would play on the right of a front 3, which Brendan Rodgers likes. They can also switch, he doesn't have to stay on the right the whole game. I think we need 2 strikers, probably before we sign anyone else! This is the worst bunch of forwards in my time watching Celtic.
28 May 2016 12:59:10
A proper centre forward wouldn't score as many deep river boy as he'd be setting up a poacher type like Griffiths and Griffiths wouldn't have to do as much running and chasing a back four. At any point did I say Griffiths wouldn't be playing? With a different type of striker I think other players would score more. This is a topic for discussion, you don't need to agree as I'm just putting a point out. This is a banter page.
28 May 2016 13:24:24
I never said you dint want to play him i just don't see your point at all nt . moving a 40 goal striker out wide to bring in a proper striker? Isn't 52 in 72 the work of a proper striker? by all means bring in someone to help but why move as you say a poacher out wide? To me it doesn't make sense. look at the duds we've had in recent years who couldn't kick Derek johnstone arse . we finally have someone hitting goals regular and improving every season in all departments of his game. and you want to move him.
28 May 2016 13:49:09
I again speculated that he might move out wide, and just wanted others views. I'm not the manager so I can't change anyone's position. I wouldn't say Griffiths is a proper centre forward (I didn't say he wasn't a striker) . In my view a proper centre forward is a hartson/ sutton/ pelle. Griffiths does a lot of running the channels and I think I player like this holding the ball up would benefit him.
My initial was IF Rodgers was to go with a 3 as he did at Liverpool would Griffiths work as the middle of a 3; I don't think he'd play the role as well as someone else could.
28 May 2016 17:03:07
Maybe Griffiths in goals a direct swap with Gordon, both have experience of, in Griffiths case getting ball past goalie, so he should know what to do as a goalie against a striker and similarly Gordon would know what he didn't like strikers doing and would score a whole bag of goals .
Makes as much sense as taking Griffiths out of striker role and playing as a winger.
28 May 2016 17:08:10
If he goes with a top three then the strikers will be swapping and moving all the time like they done a lot at liverpool
29 May 2016 13:49:39
What a load of total nonsense from some posters on here. Griffiths spends a lot of his time in the wide areas at the moment and I think would benefit from someone holding the ball up and bringing other players into play. I would certainly be interested to try it out and means we would have a lot of fire power upfront if it was successful. Comparing it to swap for CG just makes you look daft IMO.