442......It’s not the answer.

[busby1985]

We have many threads at the moment across many topics etc but I see the same thing pop

up all the time about how we fix our current situation...........442. 

 

442 isn’t the answer. It’s out dated and simply doesn’t work with the group of players we have.

 

442 leaves you with nothing between the lines. Some sides try play a diamond in a 442 to combat this but that leaves you massively exposed against anyone playing 352 or 4231. We seen this when we played Dundee United at tynie. They came for a draw and looking to nab one on the break, which they got, all be it due to us not taking our chances etc. We played straight 442 which left Clare and Irving up against 3 in the middle plus anyone drifting in from out wide or the striker dropping back. That left us up against a spare man every time, which in turn stopped us dictating the tempo we wanted and stopped us getting the ball into dangerous areas as quickly as we would’ve liked. If a side plays 4231 and we play 442 it means we are always up against an extra man in nearly every position on the park. They can go man for man in the middle, they’d still have the extra body. Out wide, same story, up top, same story. 442 doesn’t work. 

 

The other problem that comes from 442 is width and the lack of it and how easy it is to stop you getting width. We played 442 against County and played Naismith out wide, he’s not a winger and doesn’t naturally play wide. You can add walker into this scenario as well. When a non natural wide player plays wide they always look to come inside. If you are defending against a non winger, you want them to come inside, it’s easier to defend. Which we saw with Naismith and we have seen with Walker as well. Show them inside and they are coming into an all ready congested middle of the park where the defending team have strength in numbers and it’s easier to win the ball back, like County done. Mulraney is arguable our only natural winger, and he’s great at it. The problem he faces is he barely gets the ball quick enough or has the ball played in front of him to get driving at defenders. Then you factor in tynie and how narrow it is, it’s not suited to 442 in the modern game. 

 

4231 is the perfect shape for us and gets everyone playing in their natural positions and stops us getting over run and out numbered in the areas that matter. 

 

Joel 

Smith Souttar Halkett Hickey 

Whelan Haring 

Walker Naismith Mulraney 

Washington

 

Thats our strongest team and strongest formation (IMO) for the players we have. Means we can have overloads on both wings with Hickey and Mulraney and Walker and Smith. With injuries we can sub in Clare, Meshino, White and Brandon. Options in the middle with Damour and Irving more than capable of slotting in. Berra obviously and jambo solider. 4231 gives us balance across the park as well and gets our best players on the ball in positions they can effect the game. Halkett and Souttar in the middle playing out from the keeper. Whelan picking passes in the middle and Haring breaking up play, both their strong points. Naismith as a ten, supporting Washington and playing off second balls, also dropping and carrying the ball off Whelan or Haring. Walker and Mulraney with the right and left back over loads. 

 

We play into teams hands with 442. I get that people think Washington needs support and 442 gives him that. That’s not what Washington needs. He needs service and a team dictating the play. When we start slow, like Hamilton, you can physically see the players start to get frustrated. Washington can’t work off long balls up to him, in fairness, neither can uche. No striker wants to be standing with their back to goal, 6 foot tall, minging defender smashing into them challenging for headers. They want to be facing up a defender, driving towards goal. Against Hamilton you could see Washington starting to drift out of position trying to get involved in the game, that’s due to the slow tempo and not getting him the service.

 

We blew teams away under Burley in the opening 20 minutes. People will scream that was due to us playing 442, it wasn’t, it was the tempo of our play. Teams couldn’t handle how fast we started. 

 

All just my opinion of course. 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

Good case well made. 

 

But do we actually play 442 in practice during games?

Edited September 8, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Spellczech]

6 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Good case well made. 

 

But do we actually play 442 in practice during games?

442 is now just a defensive setup, and even then only when defending deep so there is no space between the 2 banks of 4. No use when you have the ball.

[Spellczech]

Just now, Spellczech said:

442 is now just a defensive setup, and even then only when defending deep so there is no space between the 2 banks of 4. No use when you have the ball. It is too flat in the midfield and only ever gives a midfielder 2 lateral options at most.

 

[busby1985]

8 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Good case well made. 

 

But do we actually play 442 in practice during games?

We played 442 in the bet fred and against County. My point is more that people scream for 442 as if it solves all our problems when in fact it’s an awful way to set up in the modern game. 

[graygo]

6 minutes ago, busby1985 said:

We played 442 in the bet fred and against County. My point is more that people scream for 442 as if it solves all our problems when in fact it’s an awful way to set up in the modern game. 

 

Fact is that whatever way we set up people will scream that we are doing it wrong, nothing worse than amateur experts.

[Elshin]

The modern 4 2 3 1 is my favourite and suits our squad.  I think we try this at times but the squads lack of movement and constant aimless long balls wont work no matter the formation we play.

 

For me it would be; 

 

A proper wing back with the other side tucking into a back 3.  Smith can play both back 3 and attack so suits our team for him to be either attacking or the holding right back.

 

2 holding midfielders, haring damour and whelan to play these 2 positions infront of defence.   They should always be moving to take the ball off the defence to prevent aimless balls up front.

 

This should leave 4 very attacking players in an almost diamond.  Ideally uche would find form to be the front man.    Washington mashino naismith all in behind making runs ahead of uche.   Claire mulraney also fits into this front 4.     Almost fluid positions which makes a wide front 3 at times.

 

 

[busby1985]

4 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Fact is that whatever way we set up people will scream that we are doing it wrong, nothing worse than amateur experts.

Don’t disagree with that, that’s also a problem with modern football. You don’t, however, need to be a professional coach to see the flaws in setting up in 442, IMO. 442 is like the old mans go to set up, like it’s the holy grail of formations. 

[Brave Hearts]

28 minutes ago, busby1985 said:

We have many threads at the moment across many topics etc but I see the same thing pop

up all the time about how we fix our current situation...........442. 

 

442 isn’t the answer. It’s out dated and simply doesn’t work with the group of players we have.

 

442 leaves you with nothing between the lines. Some sides try play a diamond in a 442 to combat this but that leaves you massively exposed against anyone playing 352 or 4231. We seen this when we played Dundee United at tynie. They came for a draw and looking to nab one on the break, which they got, all be it due to us not taking our chances etc. We played straight 442 which left Clare and Irving up against 3 in the middle plus anyone drifting in from out wide or the striker dropping back. That left us up against a spare man every time, which in turn stopped us dictating the tempo we wanted and stopped us getting the ball into dangerous areas as quickly as we would’ve liked. If a side plays 4231 and we play 442 it means we are always up against an extra man in nearly every position on the park. They can go man for man in the middle, they’d still have the extra body. Out wide, same story, up top, same story. 442 doesn’t work. 

 

The other problem that comes from 442 is width and the lack of it and how easy it is to stop you getting width. We played 442 against County and played Naismith out wide, he’s not a winger and doesn’t naturally play wide. You can add walker into this scenario as well. When a non natural wide player plays wide they always look to come inside. If you are defending against a non winger, you want them to come inside, it’s easier to defend. Which we saw with Naismith and we have seen with Walker as well. Show them inside and they are coming into an all ready congested middle of the park where the defending team have strength in numbers and it’s easier to win the ball back, like County done. Mulraney is arguable our only natural winger, and he’s great at it. The problem he faces is he barely gets the ball quick enough or has the ball played in front of him to get driving at defenders. Then you factor in tynie and how narrow it is, it’s not suited to 442 in the modern game. 

 

4231 is the perfect shape for us and gets everyone playing in their natural positions and stops us getting over run and out numbered in the areas that matter. 

 

Joel 

Smith Souttar Halkett Hickey 

Whelan Haring 

Walker Naismith Mulraney 

Washington

 

Thats our strongest team and strongest formation (IMO) for the players we have. Means we can have overloads on both wings with Hickey and Mulraney and Walker and Smith. With injuries we can sub in Clare, Meshino, White and Brandon. Options in the middle with Damour and Irving more than capable of slotting in. Berra obviously and jambo solider. 4231 gives us balance across the park as well and gets our best players on the ball in positions they can effect the game. Halkett and Souttar in the middle playing out from the keeper. Whelan picking passes in the middle and Haring breaking up play, both their strong points. Naismith as a ten, supporting Washington and playing off second balls, also dropping and carrying the ball off Whelan or Haring. Walker and Mulraney with the right and left back over loads. 

 

We play into teams hands with 442. I get that people think Washington needs support and 442 gives him that. That’s not what Washington needs. He needs service and a team dictating the play. When we start slow, like Hamilton, you can physically see the players start to get frustrated. Washington can’t work off long balls up to him, in fairness, neither can uche. No striker wants to be standing with their back to goal, 6 foot tall, minging defender smashing into them challenging for headers. They want to be facing up a defender, driving towards goal. Against Hamilton you could see Washington starting to drift out of position trying to get involved in the game, that’s due to the slow tempo and not getting him the service.

 

We blew teams away under Burley in the opening 20 minutes. People will scream that was due to us playing 442, it wasn’t, it was the tempo of our play. Teams couldn’t handle how fast we started. 

 

All just my opinion of course. 

 

 

 

Problem with this formation and the best players for it, is that 5 of them are currently injured (including Naysmith as not stripped for Scotland game).

 

 

[E6 Inc]

We could play 442 and win. We could play 451 and win. We could also play 352 and win. 

 

Problem for me is week to week we change between every system known to man and chop and change the personal. 

 

Nobody knows who is playing in what shape each week and that has got to effect performance. 

 

I bet if we played 442 each week with our strongest 11 (baring injuries of course) we would have picked up more points this year.

[Glottis]

I  agree but don't want to completely slate the 442 as if it's only used by dinosaurs.

Against certain teams, it has it's uses.

Had we had Uche up front instead of Meshino against Hamilton, I reckon we'd have cruised that game easy.

 

442 gives us more defensive strength down the sides (where most of the SPFL prem teams focus their attack)

It also gives us 2 strikers who can work together.

The Scottish game has a lot of high balls and having 2 strikers makes those high balls a lot easier to manage and create from.

 

Naismith wasn't fit against County and that was obvious to see. Levein was wrong to play him.

 

 

My preference is also the 451 

I would like Uche at the top of it though with Washington on the right.

[TheOak88]

I honesty haven’t seen anyone clambering for 4-4-2. Have I missed something?

 

Hamilton played 4-4-2 against us last week and got a result. Our defence didn’t know how to defend against 2 strikers.  

[martoon]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

Good case well made. 

 

But do we actually play 442 in practice during games?

 

No one knows.

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

1 hour ago, busby1985 said:

 

 

Joel 

Smith Souttar Halkett Hickey 

Whelan Haring 

Walker Naismith Mulraney 

Washington

 

Thats our strongest team and strongest formation (IMO) for the players we have.  

 

 

 

I like a 4-2-3-1 and I agree that would be our strongest team to go with it. I think our management team spends too much time worrying about the opposition and trying to counteract their tactics, rather than just picking our best team and letting them worry about us instead.

[portobellojambo1]

51 minutes ago, busby1985 said:

We played 442 in the bet fred and against County. My point is more that people scream for 442 as if it solves all our problems when in fact it’s an awful way to set up in the modern game. 

 

The figure you mention is just a combination of numbers, adding up to 10 outfield players. The way we played against Ross County and the way we played against Motherwell were absolutely light years apart. In one we kept the ball on the deck, played it through the midfield and won. In the previous game we played as we did against Hamilton, where the ball was often played long to a single man up front and we lost. When it is written down or announced pre match that the team will be set up as 4-4-2, it very rarely ends up being that way.

[Debut 4]

1 hour ago, E6 Inc said:

We could play 442 and win. We could play 451 and win. We could also play 352 and win. 

 

Problem for me is week to week we change between every system known to man and chop and change the personal. 

 

Nobody knows who is playing in what shape each week and that has got to effect performance. 

 

I bet if we played 442 each week with our strongest 11 (baring injuries of course) we would have picked up more points this year.

Probably. Think our problems lie deeper than a formation. 

 

We really need to go back to basics and build again. Hone players on hardwork first and bed that in. Then go to work on tweaking. 

 

Feck all works if players don’t want to.  Think there’s too many people hung up on formations and strategies. No strategy works with too many sub standard players or week to week, unforced tweaking.  

[Enzo Chiefo]

It doesn't matter what system you play if you don't pass the ball quickly, move off the ball and track the runners. Too much emphasis on systems nowadays and nullifying the opposition.  Get the basics right first.

[busby1985]

I should’ve added that I wasn’t saying sort the formation and everything will be golden. I understand that we have big problems in terms of doing the basics, like pass, track runners, finishing etc etc. My point was more about showing the problems with 442, which seems to be a safety blanket for some as the saviour of our problems. You can play any formation you like, don’t do the basics and you’ll struggle to win. 

[Enzo Chiefo]

23 minutes ago, busby1985 said:

I should’ve added that I wasn’t saying sort the formation and everything will be golden. I understand that we have big problems in terms of doing the basics, like pass, track runners, finishing etc etc. My point was more about showing the problems with 442, which seems to be a safety blanket for some as the saviour of our problems. You can play any formation you like, don’t do the basics and you’ll struggle to win. 

Totally agree. Some good points there Busby.

[Baxfee]

Let’s have some original thoughts. I know, it’s all CLs fault and I’m sure AB has something do with it to. We’re destined for relegation and will probably implode. Anything else??? 

[graygo]

1 minute ago, Baxfee said:

Let’s have some original thoughts. I know, it’s all CLs fault and I’m sure AB has something do with it to. We’re destined for relegation and will probably implode. Anything else??? 

 

We'll not be able to put out a team unless we get rid of our training methods and medical team.

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

We very rarely play 442

[Cruyff Turn]

We don’t need to play one formation during a game, we should have a different shape for each phase of play. 

 

Using Napoli under Sarri as an example of how it “should” be done.

 

Starting Shape - 4-3-3 

 

 

In this # 17 is Hamsik,  #8 is Jorginho and #5 is Allan

 

To put this into context for us, let’s say #17 is Naismith, #8 is Irving and #5 is Whelan.

 

Build up shape - 3-4-3

 

 

Two full backs push forward, the two Centerhalfs Split and #8 drops in to Central defence.

 

This means that the opposition can’t put pressure on the Centerhalfs because there is a 3 v 2 situation in Napoli’s favour and they can easily break the first line of pressure and move the ball into midfield or down the flanks with ease.

 

Attacking Shape - 4-2-3-1

 

 

So when Napoli have possession. I’m assuming their play in this scenario is directed down the right hand side because they are looking to move all their attacking players into that area forcing the opposition to move across and make them really narrow.

 

Also, on the left you’ll notice that Napoli’s Left back is about to become their left winger. If the opposition moves across and becomes too narrow, Napoli can move it back into midfield and switch play to the left, stretching them the other way.

 

Pressing/Counter pressing Shape - 4-4-2

 

 

Talking about a 4-4-2. For build up play it’s too flat and outdated, but for a high press, it is very much the go to formation.

 

Against any back 4 it forces the opposition to either punt it long & lose possession, or take serious risks if they are trying to play out from the back. 

 

Defensive shape - 4-1-4-1/4-5-1

 

 

Difficult to break down. Men behind the ball and you’re not going to be able to stretch them. To score the opposition is going to have to play through their lines.

 

 

 

Obviously, we are not Napoli and playing this way doesn’t necessarily mean our players could manage to play magnificent football. We’re going to be very different in possession because we don’t have the same levels of ability.

 

What it shows though is that that it is not about playing just one shape or formation, it is about drilling players into understanding how to create an extra man,  to play through opposition lines and how to press and defend when the opposition have the ball in different areas of the pitch.

 

🤷🏼‍♂️🤓🤦🏻‍♂️

[busby1985]

6 minutes ago, Cruyff Turn said:

We don’t need to play one formation during a game, we should have a different shape for each phase of play. 

 

Using Napoli under Sarri as an example of how it “should” be done.

 

Starting Shape - 4-3-3 

 

 

In this # 17 is Hamsik,  #8 is Jorginho and #5 is Allan

 

To put this into context for us, let’s say #17 is Naismith, #8 is Irving and #5 is Whelan.

 

Build up shape - 3-4-3

 

 

Two full backs push forward, the two Centerhalfs Split and #8 drops in to Central defence.

 

This means that the opposition can’t put pressure on the Centerhalfs because there is a 3 v 2 situation in Napoli’s favour and they can easily break the first line of pressure and move the ball into midfield or down the flanks with ease.

 

Attacking Shape - 4-2-3-1

 

 

So when Napoli have possession. I’m assuming their play in this scenario is directed down the right hand side because they are looking to move all their attacking players into that area forcing the opposition to move across and make them really narrow.

 

Also, on the left you’ll notice that Napoli’s Left back is about to become their left winger. If the opposition moves across and becomes too narrow, Napoli can move it back into midfield and switch play to the left, stretching them the other way.

 

Pressing/Counter pressing Shape - 4-4-2

 

 

Talking about a 4-4-2. For build up play it’s too flat and outdated, but for a high press, it is very much the go to formation.

 

Against any back 4 it forces the opposition to either punt it long & lose possession, or take serious risks if they are trying to play out from the back. 

 

Defensive shape - 4-1-4-1/4-5-1

 

 

Difficult to break down. Men behind the ball and you’re not going to be able to stretch them. To score the opposition is going to have to play through their lines.

 

 

 

Obviously, we are not Napoli and playing this way doesn’t necessarily mean our players could manage to play magnificent football. We’re going to be very different in possession because we don’t have the same levels of ability.

 

What it shows though is that that it is not about playing just one shape or formation, it is about drilling players into understanding how to create an extra man,  to play through opposition lines and how to press and defend when the opposition have the ball in different areas of the pitch.

 

🤷🏼‍♂️🤓🤦🏻‍♂️

Good detail. 

 

My point was more about the people shouting for 442 but you’ve nailed how a solid formation can be fluid and if the players are well drilled, can be a huge weapon. Rangers under Gerrard and the Beale boy, actual play through the lines very well and have a very fluid formation that works for their players. Often set up as 4231 but with Tav playing so far forward when they attack they actual turn their back 4 into a 3 as Tav basically becomes a winger. Celtic stopped them doing that last week by doubling up on his side and leaving Flanno exposed and forcing Rangers to try play through him. 

 

Straight 442 doesn’t suit us or the way in which we like to play. People think playing 442 will see results and is often screamed in desperation by old men who have lost touched with modern football. Imagine old boys in the tynie arms. 

 

We need better coaching but i didnt didn’t want my thread to turn into another debate about that. Been covered. 

 

Mental to think Chelsea chased Sari eh. 

[Spellczech]

1 hour ago, busby1985 said:

I should’ve added that I wasn’t saying sort the formation and everything will be golden. I understand that we have big problems in terms of doing the basics, like pass, track runners, finishing etc etc. My point was more about showing the problems with 442, which seems to be a safety blanket for some as the saviour of our problems. You can play any formation you like, don’t do the basics and you’ll struggle to win. 

I think a lot of the criticism comes from people wanting to see support for our main striker whether it be Uche or Washington. However, support is not necessarily another striker. It can better quality balls - either to feet or pinged in high rather than floated in hopefully, or a willingness for midfielders and FBs to get ahead of the ball. 

 

My personal opinion is that our players can be "lazy" about finding space and offering the man with the ball mutiple options. Whether this is pure lazyness or avoiding the pass due to lack of confidence for fear of making a mistake and annoying our fans, is a question open to debate...

[mitch41]

We could play 442, 433, 4132, 41212, 352 it doesn’t really matter with Levein & co. it really doesn’t matter because our management have either kept players at the club or brought in players they have picked and yet we have a disorganised team that is not only bad to watch but can’t beat teams with players that we would never want at Tynecastle. Hearts under Levein & co. have plan A at the start of the game but after the opposition make changes or reorganise their tactics our dugout are lost. Levein will talk to McPhee and nothing happens when it is obvious what is needed. We have some talented players who are underperforming because they are not managed / coached tactically or positionally to a good enough level with a real lack of leadership on the pitch. Some fans are going on about who should be captain but all good successful teams have many players who are leaders and act as captains. 

Motherwell could be Levein & his Bootroom’s last game win draw or lose we need an immediate change of management.

[graygo]

2 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

We could play 442, 433, 4132, 41212, 352 it doesn’t really matter with Levein & co. it really doesn’t matter because our management have either kept players at the club or brought in players they have picked and yet we have a disorganised team that is not only bad to watch but can’t beat teams with players that we would never want at Tynecastle. Hearts under Levein & co. have plan A at the start of the game but after the opposition make changes or reorganise their tactics our dugout are lost. Levein will talk to McPhee and nothing happens when it is obvious what is needed. We have some talented players who are underperforming because they are not managed / coached tactically or positionally to a good enough level with a real lack of leadership on the pitch. Some fans are going on about who should be captain but all good successful teams have many players who are leaders and act as captains. 

Motherwell could be Levein & his Bootroom’s last game win draw or lose we need an immediate change of management.

 

Blah blah blah LEVEIN OOT!!!

[Psychedelicropcircle]

Craig is not the answer!

 

 

Delete thread!

[DG_HMFC]

I don't think 442 is outdated, we just don't have the wide players to make it successful.

[jr ewing]

Hoofball accomodates 2 up front. Back to the eighties and happier times.😎

[Jamhammer]

With any system fluidity is the key in the modern game. Football isn't complicated really. When you don't have the ball you have to graft to get it back. When you do have it you need to hold on to it and try to hurt the other team, at pace. The very best teams are capable of both. yer City's and Liverpools. Most of the others are good at one of them. We, currently don't really do either. 

[jambocub]

1 hour ago, graygo said:

 

Blah blah blah LEVEIN OOT!!!

The boys spot on what he said

[sadj]

10 minutes ago, jambocub said:

The boys spot on what he said

 

@mitch41 is never spot on with what he says 😉

[graygo]

1 hour ago, jambocub said:

The boys spot on what he said

 

So am I.

[CloustonHMFC]

3 hours ago, Cruyff Turn said:

We don’t need to play one formation during a game, we should have a different shape for each phase of play. 

 

Using Napoli under Sarri as an example of how it “should” be done.

 

Starting Shape - 4-3-3 

 

 

In this # 17 is Hamsik,  #8 is Jorginho and #5 is Allan

 

To put this into context for us, let’s say #17 is Naismith, #8 is Irving and #5 is Whelan.

 

Build up shape - 3-4-3

 

 

Two full backs push forward, the two Centerhalfs Split and #8 drops in to Central defence.

 

This means that the opposition can’t put pressure on the Centerhalfs because there is a 3 v 2 situation in Napoli’s favour and they can easily break the first line of pressure and move the ball into midfield or down the flanks with ease.

 

Attacking Shape - 4-2-3-1

 

 

So when Napoli have possession. I’m assuming their play in this scenario is directed down the right hand side because they are looking to move all their attacking players into that area forcing the opposition to move across and make them really narrow.

 

Also, on the left you’ll notice that Napoli’s Left back is about to become their left winger. If the opposition moves across and becomes too narrow, Napoli can move it back into midfield and switch play to the left, stretching them the other way.

 

Pressing/Counter pressing Shape - 4-4-2

 

 

Talking about a 4-4-2. For build up play it’s too flat and outdated, but for a high press, it is very much the go to formation.

 

Against any back 4 it forces the opposition to either punt it long & lose possession, or take serious risks if they are trying to play out from the back. 

 

Defensive shape - 4-1-4-1/4-5-1

 

 

Difficult to break down. Men behind the ball and you’re not going to be able to stretch them. To score the opposition is going to have to play through their lines.

 

 

 

Obviously, we are not Napoli and playing this way doesn’t necessarily mean our players could manage to play magnificent football. We’re going to be very different in possession because we don’t have the same levels of ability.

 

What it shows though is that that it is not about playing just one shape or formation, it is about drilling players into understanding how to create an extra man,  to play through opposition lines and how to press and defend when the opposition have the ball in different areas of the pitch.

 

🤷🏼‍♂️🤓🤦🏻‍♂️

Good post.

 

Football has moved on and most of the top teams play a fluid formation. IMO we tried this last season and people were screaming from the roof tops that we need to revert to 442. 

[Debut 4]

Think you need a degree to be a footballer these days.  

[rudi must stay]

4-4-2 is a fantastic formation but I do believe

3-5-2 is the answer and where the game has gone. Possibly due to full backs now being wing backs that are better going forward than defending and defenders having good passing ability

 

It allows quick turnovers, good chance creation opportunities and strengths in the midfield, but it does of course rely on a strong organised defence. 

 

Id like to see us play it and sticks with it. It's the way to go.

 

My team:

 

Pereira

 

Berra (commands a 3 well) Halkett Dikamona

 

Meshino Whelan Damour Irving Mulraney

 

Uche Washington

 

 

 

Edited September 8, 2019 by rudi must stay

[mitch41]

5 hours ago, graygo said:

 

Blah blah blah LEVEIN OOT!!!

Graygo you are so predictable.

[mitch41]

4 hours ago, sadj said:

 

@mitch41 is never spot on with what he says 😉

sadj you are so predictable.

[graygo]

2 hours ago, mitch41 said:

Graygo you are so predictable.

 

 

 

Edited September 8, 2019 by graygo