Team for Gateshead

I'd go with......
  

                                     McKeown

Bignot             Pearson(c)             Nsiala             Magnay


                          Brown              McLaughlin


Mackreth                                                            Nielson

                         Pitman              Connell

Subs
Walker
Boyce
Disley
Winfarrah/Clay
LJL

Quoted from Meza

I'd go with......
  

                                     McKeown

Bignot             Pearson(c)             Nsiala             Magnay


                          Brown              McLaughlin


Mackreth                                                            Nielson

                         Pitman              Connell

Subs
Walker
Boyce
Disley
Winfarrah/Clay
LJL

this.

Quoted from Meza

I'd go with......
  

                                     McKeown

Bignot             Pearson(c)             Nsiala             Magnay


                          Brown              McLaughlin


Mackreth                                                            Nielson

                         Pitman              Connell

Subs
Walker
Boyce
Disley
Winfarrah/Clay
LJL

Quite like this meza

I'd go with that defence but Disley in for McLaughlin and LJL for Pittman. Reckon it's worth leaving Pittman on the bench to bring on as an impact sub in the second half. Also, you never know - if a chance falls to Connell, he could certainly knock it in.

Quoted from Maringer

Regardless of who was to play, I think 1 up top would be a poor idea, even if they were theoretically supported by 2 other wider men because it's all too easy for players to be sucked back into midfield, leaving the lone forward utterly isolated.

Whether they end up getting "sucked back" is another matter !
Cart before the horse ?
But if they do, isn't it better 1 forward is isolated than 2 or 3 ?

Quoted from Maringer

If you want to play with a solo striker, LJL is the obvious choice or possibly Pittman might be capable as well though I'd doubt his ability to last 90 minutes.

Perhaps it depends whether you're direct/long ball or trying to keep it "on the deck".
There's nothing wrong with playing 1 "goalscorer" per se if you're trying to make opportunities by passing the ball.
And there's more creative players back now for this game who might help in that regard.

Quoted from Maringer

Playing Connell up front on his own sounds like utter madness to me. He's not strong enough to hold up or link up play, has no pace to run on to passes and has offered absolutely no threat in his first 3 appearances.

Write him off after 3 games then, well done !  
Who knows what will happen but if he does come good again, not unthinkable we'll see a 25 yard screamer.

As for "not strong enough" point taken but you don't always need to be strong to "link up play".
One of Connell's rare highlights on Saturday was his passing.
From that perspective, not impossible he can "link up" (passing) with others if they can push up in support of him.
But obviously if he was to play lone striker the intention wouldn't be to play him as TARGET MAN where the ball was simply hoofed up to him from the back !  

Anyway personally I'd be tempted to play young wing backs.
Arguably no better time to see whether they're "up to the job" than now.
i.e. We'll have done well to get a point WHOEVER plays.
Not being negative, saying they'll have done well to get a result v a side unbeaten at home since Feb !

If the youngsters just "aren't up to it" (yet) then least we'll know and can "re-evaluate" things.
If not now for the wingbacks then when ? Monday ?! Next Xmas ?!
Maybe it's better to find out more than wait all day or never know at all...

So I'd go to Heed looking for a good result while getting match time into those returning and thinking ahead to Monday too.

..............McKeown
.........Boyce.....Pearson
Walker.........Clay.......Winfarrah
...........Disley.......Paddy......
Mackreth.....Connell......Neilson

Subs (see Monday): Magnay, Toto, Brown, Pittman, John Lewis

Wing backs with 2 centre backs?!

Oh here we go...
Fullbacks pushing up from fullback wherever possible or slightly advanced fullbacks then.

You may notice Abdul I haven't been through everyone elses team asking questions or pulling them apart.

That said I do see your team doesn't even have players assembled in any kind of positions at all.  
So perhaps it's bit ironic you're questioning mine ?

Not really wing backs then, just full backs that like to get forward (like most full backs)

My side's quite clearly a 4-4-2 (the gaps are a giveaway); I could start drawing arrows and stuff but I don't think Scott Neilson needs an arrow to tell him to run forward!

80's why would you drop Brown for Clay?

Quoted from Abdul19

Not really wing backs then, just full backs that like to get forward (like most full backs)

No idea !
Don't how what YOUR definition of wing back is.
Suffice to say I'm not arguing over everyone elses unknown definition either.

For me if they're positioned slightly further forward (in my case helping a 3 man central midfield), "playing down the WING" [feel free to argue the toss ad infinum without offering your own definition here too !] and also BACK defending it's good enough for me.

In short, define it how you want to, I don't give a toss !

If picking over 80's definition of wing back is really the strongest reason there is for saying Hurst should be on his bike, it's pretty desperate and pathetic IMO.