Why Macclesfield Town can defy the odds again in Emirates FA Cup
Despite lying 43 league places above their Emirates FA Cup opponents, Oxford United could well become the next victims of a cup giant-killing when they head to Macclesfield Town.
Holroyd can be the hero
Having featured for the likes of Preston North End and Stevenage in League One, there’s no question that Macc striker Chris Holroyd has real quality. But this season looks to have found the 30-year-old at the peak of his powers.
With nine goals in 21 games so far this season – including a superb double at Aldershot in November – he’s equally dangerous in the air as with a stinging strike.
A bona fide match winner, don’t be surprised to see him make the difference for the Silkmen once again – though defender Danny Rowe also has a knack of stealing the headlines with his trademark headers.
U’s blues on their travels
Times have been good for Oxford of late, with the 1986 League Cup winners winning promotion back to League One after an excellent campaign last time out.
But their away form has prevented the Yellows from building on their success this season, with eight losses and three draws from their last 13 on the road.
Return of the Macc
Despite being the underdogs tomorrow night, this is hardly unfamiliar territory for the Cheshire club, who have reached the Third Round of the Emirates FA Cup in eight of the last 15 seasons.
In the past five seasons alone, they’ve knocked out the likes of Swindon Town, Walsall (earlier this season) and Cardiff City, as well as losing just 1-0 to eventual cup winners Wigan Athletic back in 2012-13.
With the current crop showing their confidence and class en route to victory at the Banks’s Stadium last month, don’t bet against another memorable triumph for John Askey’s men.
In the match betting, Macclesfield are generously priced at 15/4 to win, while you can back Macc to win and both teams to score at 8/1 – a tempting selection considering the pair have scored in eight of their last ten outings combined.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing