daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 21 hours ago, Fox92 said: There was no point in bringing him off. Okazaki did nothing wrong. Second half we kicked off - a bit of fast pace for once - passed to King who mis-controlled the ball and went backwards. Sums him up. Does it though? Because that analysis would sum up the philosophy installed by Ranieri or whatever in Drinkwater, Morgan, Huth, Simpson, Fuchs et al but not Andy King. Fans of the club before last year will sum Andy King up as firstly a club legend but secondly as a forward thinking, attacking midfielder - who - when played in his preferred position is a threat to any team.
Lionheart10 Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 21 hours ago, the-blue-wildabeast said: The fact we are champions who have spent £80m and still play league one standard players like King, shinji and Musa goes a long way to explaining why we are one of, if not the, worst team in the premier league, especially in terms of technical ability. As much as I love Andy King for his achievements with us this is true,we are losing to Man Utd and we bring him on what does that say?He has been outstanding for this club but he really isn't a Premier League player.
Bayfox Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 52 minutes ago, crazyleicester said: Apologies I was defending Kingy coming on as a sub is a BETTER goal scoring option than the rest.... Sorry mate. You stated drinky was your preferred. Misunderstood.
FLAN Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 I would never consider a player who is happily on the bench season after season as a legend. If he had anything about him a lower end prem or competing champ club would have snapped him up years ago. If they tried and he stayed here it shows he has no faith in his own ability. And that shows in his general approach to the game. This myth of him being a natural attacking player hasn't been obvious of late. Theee are a couple of times this season where he had options to attack the goal (headers) but instead headed across goal passing on the responsibility. He's clever enough to have realised early on that if he kept his head down he had a job for life. He isn't to blame for our predicament but he frustrates the hell out of me when he is on the pitch.
Fox92 Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 1 hour ago, daddylonglegs said: Does it though? Because that analysis would sum up the philosophy installed by Ranieri or whatever in Drinkwater, Morgan, Huth, Simpson, Fuchs et al but not Andy King. Fans of the club before last year will sum Andy King up as firstly a club legend but secondly as a forward thinking, attacking midfielder - who - when played in his preferred position is a threat to any team. Yes it does sum him up. He goes backwards, always has always will, do not deny it... He made no impact when he came on yesterday - it was a strange sub as Okazaki didn't do that much but at least was pressing and closing gaps.- but King's overall game is negative. And he isn't good enough for this level - okay to bring off the bench to keep the ball but rarely makes an impact. I don't think he's an attacking midfielder but you obviously do and what he did add yesterday? ... It's very difficult to come on at 0-2 down but Gray played the same amount of minutes and was much more effective. I like him, don't get me wrong but he's far from "forward thinking" and he's far from a Premier League attacking midfielder. He goes sideways and backwards more that he goes forwards. He'd get much more criticism if he hadn't been at the club for as long as he has. As for a legend... Why's that? Because he played in League One? Legends play every single game of every week.
daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 58 minutes ago, Fox92 said: Yes it does sum him up. He goes backwards, always has always will, do not deny it... He made no impact when he came on yesterday - it was a strange sub as Okazaki didn't do that much but at least was pressing and closing gaps.- but King's overall game is negative. And he isn't good enough for this level - okay to bring off the bench to keep the ball but rarely makes an impact. I don't think he's an attacking midfielder but you obviously do and what he did add yesterday? ... It's very difficult to come on at 0-2 down but Gray played the same amount of minutes and was much more effective. I like him, don't get me wrong but he's far from "forward thinking" and he's far from a Premier League attacking midfielder. He goes sideways and backwards more that he goes forwards. He'd get much more criticism if he hadn't been at the club for as long as he has. As for a legend... Why's that? Because he played in League One? Legends play every single game of every week. Surely this bit is tongue in cheek?
Clever Fox Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 Real legends leave there Mark on the Pitch by performances. He doesn't even score anymore. On the other hand if we are going down then he'll be more comfortable in the Championship.
Fox92 Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 8 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said: Surely this bit is tongue in cheek? Yes. Just like your comment to me about people that were fans prior to last season. Stand by my other points though.
Claridge Posted 6 February 2017 Author Posted 6 February 2017 3 hours ago, daddylonglegs said: Does it though? Because that analysis would sum up the philosophy installed by Ranieri or whatever in Drinkwater, Morgan, Huth, Simpson, Fuchs et al but not Andy King. Fans of the club before last year will sum Andy King up as firstly a club legend but secondly as a forward thinking, attacking midfielder - who - when played in his preferred position is a threat to any team. Be talked about for years Andy King club legend? Get a grip of yourself,he has been a decent servant,happy to become a millionaire ,whilst not really setting the world on fire at any time in his career
daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 3 minutes ago, Fox92 said: Yes. Just like your comment to me about people that were fans prior to last season. Stand by my other points though. Fair enough. I think he gets a lot of undeserved and unfair stick whilst players like Simpson... genuinely bad footballers seem to escape any at all.
funkyrobot Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 3 hours ago, daddylonglegs said: Does it though? Because that analysis would sum up the philosophy installed by Ranieri or whatever in Drinkwater, Morgan, Huth, Simpson, Fuchs et al but not Andy King. Fans of the club before last year will sum Andy King up as firstly a club legend but secondly as a forward thinking, attacking midfielder - who - when played in his preferred position is a threat to any team. That's simply not true. I've been going to Leicester games for over 30 years and I would never put Andy King (nice guy though he is) anywhere near the pedestal you've put him on. He was/is a useful finisher and he's loyal and probably a great guy to keep around the squad but he barely threatens and is usually anonymous in our midfield rather than being a threat.
MC Prussian Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 People are a bit too quick criticizing King here, but what were the other options coming from the bench? We only had a 20-year old Cabbage available as another central midfield variable, but Ranieri doesn't rate him (yet). Would he have been better in the middle of the park? I always envision Cabbage as a left midfielder due to his impact at last year's EURO. Bottom line is, we failed miserably at addressing our central midfield situation last summer (and this January), opting for defensive midfielders when we were clearly longing for an attacking player with flair, creativity and Premier League experience. In that regard, what would you do if your hands are tied?
coolhandfox Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 If King was going to play it's should have been from the start, we needed 3 in middle. The game was gone by half time, we were never going to score 2, with or without King!
Clever Fox Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 4 minutes ago, coolhandfox said: If King was going to play it's should have been from the start, we needed 3 in middle. The game was gone by half time, we were never going to score 2, with or without King! One thing is sure he couldn't have been any worse than playing Musa in Midfield. What was CR thinking. Is it any wonder the players are confused.
coolhandfox Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 Just now, Clever Fox said: One thing is sure he couldn't have been any worse than playing Musa in Midfield. What was CR thinking. Is it any wonder the players are confused. Agreed, we were always going to be over midfield, CR has lost it tactical!
daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 25 minutes ago, funkyrobot said: That's simply not true. I've been going to Leicester games for over 30 years and I would never put Andy King (nice guy though he is) anywhere near the pedestal you've put him on. He was/is a useful finisher and he's loyal and probably a great guy to keep around the squad but he barely threatens and is usually anonymous in our midfield rather than being a threat. Yeah crap finisher is Kingy pretty shit finish against Man City this year wasn't it
MC Prussian Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 4 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said: Yeah crap finisher is Kingy pretty shit finish against Man City this year wasn't it Exceptions tend to prove the rule. But it's clear you won't get the desired impact from a player who's currently our third or fourth choice in central midfield. King's had to relinquish a more dominant role (in his Championship or later on, in his early Premier League days, but even then, James was getting the upper hand for a starting spot). He's a good, solid squad player with limited ability - either that or he can't put his talent into practice.
daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 11 minutes ago, MC Prussian said: Exceptions tend to prove the rule. But it's clear you won't get the desired impact from a player who's currently our third or fourth choice in central midfield. King's had to relinquish a more dominant role (in his Championship or later on, in his early Premier League days, but even then, James was getting the upper hand for a starting spot). He's a good, solid squad player with limited ability - either that or he can't put his talent into practice. Look - the guys scored some brilliant, and on occasion utterly essential goals for this club. He's been a brilliant servant and doesn't deserve the stick he gets. That's the only point I'm making.
dynamark Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 Couple of previous posters on this thread have said it .When the team sheet goes up essentially 2 in midfield and immeadiate dread it will not be enough against these.Pogba sits and hits medium diagonal forward balls past our 2 plus the wide men everyone can see it will not work if we don't have the ball.. We charged about and held it for 40 minutes got a bit loose and stretched with the set up twice and two simple goals. They stroked it about all afternoon like a training exercise. Mata could easily have got a red though one on MOTD Saturday very similar.
Roosters boots Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 31 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said: Yeah crap finisher is Kingy pretty shit finish against Man City this year wasn't it Any decent keeper would of saved it .
daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 3 minutes ago, Roosters boots said: Any decent keeper would of saved it . Jesus wept.
Clever Fox Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 17 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said: Look - the guys scored some brilliant, and on occasion utterly essential goals for this club. He's been a brilliant servant and doesn't deserve the stick he gets. That's the only point I'm making. there's no one disputing what you say, but we have moved on from those days. There's no sentiment in Football except by losers. Were at our lowest ebb losing every week. Yet when given a chance he hasn't delivered anything. He's also holding down a squad place which could have been filled by a more skilled player. These are the type of decisions that have us where we are.
funkyrobot Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 1 hour ago, funkyrobot said: That's simply not true. I've been going to Leicester games for over 30 years and I would never put Andy King (nice guy though he is) anywhere near the pedestal you've put him on. He was/is a useful finisher and he's loyal and probably a great guy to keep around the squad but he barely threatens and is usually anonymous in our midfield rather than being a threat. 35 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said: Yeah crap finisher is Kingy pretty shit finish against Man City this year wasn't it Err the only thing crap here is your reading skills daddylonglegs. I said he was/is a USEFUL finisher.
daddylonglegs Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 2 minutes ago, funkyrobot said: Err the only thing crap here is your reading skills daddylonglegs. I said he was/is a USEFUL finisher. Yeah pretty crap in fairness. Apologies
AmarteyAndChill Posted 6 February 2017 Posted 6 February 2017 If kings last name was kingdinho he would be praised every day of the week. No?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.