I want to post something in a web-based discussion group. Is it correct to say the following sentence?:
"I think he should have fielded a more attacking-minded player".
The combination of past and present is as follow:
1. present: think
2. past: should have fielded
Thanks for your answer.
Hi, can I just ask which sports you are writing it for? :)
It's not cricket, is it?
"I think he should have fielded a more attacking-minded player" is fine, although I would say "attack-minded" myself.
It is about football or soccer.
What do you think about my sentence above? Is it correct?
I am still waiting for your explanation everyone....
Thanks a lot.
I agree with Dulcinea del Toboso but you might also prefer "a more attacking player".
The sentence as a whole is in the simple present. This is it's struture: "I think X." The X is "he should have fielded a more attacking player". The X is a clause that gives your thoughts. Those thoughts are about a past event. This clause has the structure "he should have done Y". It's a present perfect clause with the auxillary verb "should".
In this case "feilded" is the past participle. Compare it to the statement "I think he should have eaten a more tasty cake."
Thank you Jim. But, it raises more questions from me regarding the term "attacking-minded" and "attack-minded".
I tend to use "attacking" in this case. Could you explain why "attacking-minded" is wrong?