Guest bennytwohats Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 There are two ways of looking at this, and almost all of you have opted for the one where Claudio is the villain... Can you not see the situation where actually they've come in and done well precisely because their time has been managed well - as opposed to being chucked in back in November when they weren't ready? im with Bob, Claudio has done a lot wrong and rightly deserves his share of criticism - but this is just looking for issues to beat him with. It's a witch hunt and is a bad look for us fans imo.
Babylon Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 5 minutes ago, bennytwohats said: There are two ways of looking at this, and almost all of you have opted for the one where Claudio is the villain... Can you not see the situation where actually they've come in and done well precisely because their time has been managed well - as opposed to being chucked in back in November when they weren't ready? im with Bob, Claudio has done a lot wrong and rightly deserves his share of criticism - but this is just looking for issues to beat him with. It's a witch hunt and is a bad look for us fans imo. Benny has been here for nearly a full two seasons, he's hardly a young player either. If he wasn't ready to play any part last season, let alone this season he should never have been purchased.
Guest bennytwohats Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 9 minutes ago, Babylon said: Benny has been here for nearly a full two seasons, he's hardly a young player either. If he wasn't ready to play any part last season, let alone this season he should never have been purchased. That's all fair, but doesn't apply at all to Kapustka. I've also seen a reasonable amount to suggest there have been fitness issues, and if I recall correctly he barely made a good impression when he played early on in his City career. It's all been revised to the point he is now the saviour of LCFC. I agree he deserves a shot for lack of alternatives, but let's keep some perspective... I also completely accept Claudios signings have been poor for the most part. It's fair to criticise for that but that's not the conversation that's happening here. It's clamouring for more things to make him the scapegoat for.
Babylon Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 3 minutes ago, bennytwohats said: That's all fair, but doesn't apply at all to Kapustka. I've also seen a reasonable amount to suggest there have been fitness issues, and if I recall correctly he barely made a good impression when he played early on in his City career. It's all been revised to the point he is now the saviour of LCFC. I agree he deserves a shot for lack of alternatives, but let's keep some perspective... I also completely accept Claudios signings have been poor for the most part. It's fair to criticise for that but that's not the conversation that's happening here. It's clamouring for more things to make him the scapegoat for. I'm fine with how he's been handled and I don't think he's the saviour either. In fact I think I'm on your side of the argument in terms of them not being treated badly, I think it's actually far more likely he's just signed two players no better than what we have and he knows it. There is no point in chucking people in you don't trust.
BenTheFox Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 Benalouane isn't that good, it's just that we're all so happy to see a defender not treating the ball like a grenade throughout a whole game.
Guest Bob Hazels shorts Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 Neither are knocking on the door of the first team in the traditional way ie playing all games offered in a quest to make themselves hard not to pick. Bit of footballing aloofness with not mixing with the development lads. FA cup games against Derby's B team and a league one side sitting just above Peterborough may seem a bit more creditworthy to them. They play and are paid by us and i hope they make it, not pulled up trees though and by all accounts not playing for a reason. Just that our 'regular' players are nonperforming makes their omission look odd.
sylofox Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 +1 Not because I agree with you but you spelt Kapustka right.
Koke Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 I'm actually more worried about the fact Ranieri has had 4 transfer windows and has signed 2 CBs. Hernandez was sold 6 months after signing him and Benny has had about 10 appearances for us in nearly 2 full season's. Shambolic. We then take a punt on a guy who's played 90 career games at aged 25. The side that started vs Swansea, only 2 of the 11 starters was signed by Ranieri (Gray and Ndidi).
reynard Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 3 hours ago, BenTheFox said: Benalouane isn't that good, it's just that we're all so happy to see a defender not treating the ball like a grenade throughout a whole game. I agree. Plus he's only looked adequate at best against Derby reserves and Millwall. Against decent opposition he would look even worse than Huth and Morgan. Yet another poor signing I'm afraid.
Wymsey Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 Benalouane should've played more earlier in the season and more recently. He's decent and as good as both Huth and Morgan on his day. Kapustka, not sure he's still 'one for the future' or is considered as able to do well or better than Gray is currently doing at the moment.
Koke Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 I accept Benalouane isn't good enough and I accept if Ranieri thinks it was a bad signing. But why not rectify that? Instead he signs another bad defender in Hernandez. And another unknown journeyman on loan. Does anyone have faith in Ranieri rebuilding our back 4 in the summer? I don't.
reynard Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 4 minutes ago, Koke said: I accept Benalouane isn't good enough and I accept if Ranieri thinks it was a bad signing. But why not rectify that? Instead he signs another bad defender in Hernandez. And another unknown journeyman on loan. Does anyone have faith in Ranieri rebuilding our back 4 in the summer? I don't. I wouldn't have faith in him rebuilding a rockery let alone a football team just at the moment.
volpeazzurro Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 With regards to Benalouane, I think I saw previously on here that one of the reasons he hadn't been played was because we couldn't even if we'd wanted to. This being on the grounds that he hadn't originally been named in our 25 man squad, possibly on account that they thought he was going to be transfered out in the summer. However, since the January window that has changed because we've released Schlupp and Hernadez. He now of course has been introduced in our cup games presumably to see how he fares as a possible alternative to whoever. So no-ones fault there. I stand to be corrected on this as I'm only going from what somebody quoted on here but it does sound about right. With regards to Kaputchska, Ranieri and his management team clearly, for whatever reason, didn't think he was ready to be thrown into the Premiership just yet. As they see him every day day and note his strengths and weaknesses when training with their own Premiership players, together with his mental strength etc, they are for me better placed than us, who never see him apart from two cameo appearances against a Derby County B side and 1st division Millwall. He looks to have bags of talent and abiity but for supporters to judge on two appearances against the judgement of professionals is somewhat laughable. They seem to have a way of putting young players like Chilwell and Gray into the sides gradually and I presume they have their reasons for doing that. They also judged quite rightly that Ndidi was ready straight away albeit we are somewhat desperate in his position. From that I deduce that they're not averse to introducing young talent when they deem appropriate. There is of course nothing to say that Benalouane or Kaputchska won't feature in some way in the next to fixtures in some way now they've had an airing. I certainly think Benalouane has played well against admittedly lowere opposition but don't see him in training.
Rusko187 Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 16 hours ago, bald reynard said: The way in which Benny and Kapustka have been treated this season, is reason alone for getting rid of Claudio !? They have been the only bright sparks in recent weeks - and must keep their places. How bizarre is Claudio's decision to omit Kapustka from the Champions League squad ? Not rate Gray much?
lcfcben76 Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 1 hour ago, reynard said: I agree. Plus he's only looked adequate at best against Derby reserves and Millwall. Against decent opposition he would look even worse than Huth and Morgan. Yet another poor signing I'm afraid. How will we ever know though?? has he really done much wrong in either game, okay maybe should have done better with the clearance for the millwall goal but against derby we never looked like conceding and only did through an incredibly lucky deflection. Why not throw him in vs Liverpool it's worth a try is it not instead of slow, hoofing defenders? Could have a stormer in a 1-0 win but how will we ever know unless he gets the chance
howlinmadmurfdoc Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 5 hours ago, Matt said: Yep, I've said this twice now and I'll keep saying. I can't give an answer to why the 'first team' aren't playing for Claudio, however when the 'second team' have sat there watching this shit, get given a chance v Derby, play well then get dropped for the Swansea game I think they have every right not to 'play for Claudio'. I think one or two of them should be handing transfer requests in too. Obviously it'll get them nowhere till the summer but it's a statement of intent. As I said I can't explain the first teams problem but as regards the 'second team' Claudio has caused this. Every right not to play for Claudio? What about playing for the club that pays them more in a week than you or I get in a year? Or play for the fans that fork out a shed load of cash to watch them every week. What you've said is all bollocks, People bleating the second string need a chance when they need first team players in extra time to get them past Derby reserves, and they lost to a ten man league one team. If these players aren't willing to put in a decent shift they all want binning off in the summer.
Matt Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 7 minutes ago, howlinmadmurfdoc said: Every right not to play for Claudio? What about playing for the club that pays them more in a week than you or I get in a year? Or play for the fans that fork out a shed load of cash to watch them every week. What you've said is all bollocks, People bleating the second string need a chance when they need first team players in extra time to get them past Derby reserves, and they lost to a ten man league one team. If these players aren't willing to put in a decent shift they all want binning off in the summer. Playing for the club that pays them....They very rarely play. People bleating the second string need a chance when the need first team players in extra time to get them past Derby reserves....The first team couldn't get past them in 90 minutes, they also needed a OG and last minute goal to take it to the replay. Lost to a ten man League One team...As I've said because of the things that have gone before that game they're probably thinking what's the point, no matter how good we play we still won't get a chance to play in the first choice team because the old guard will get picked, again. Which by the way as you've said in the 2nd point they needed first team players to come on to help them, so you can tar them with the same brush of losing to a ten man League One club also.
howlinmadmurfdoc Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 Just now, Matt said: Playing for the club that pays them....They very rarely play. People bleating the second string need a chance when the need first team players in extra time to get them past Derby reserves....The first team could get past them in 90 minutes, they also needed a OG and last minute goal to take it to the replay. Lost to a ten man League One team...As I've said because of the things that have gone before that game they're probably thinking what's the point, no matter how good we play we still won't get a chance to play in the first choice team because the old guard will get picked, again. They're PROFESSIONAL footballers, it's about time they started acting like it.
Matt Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 1 minute ago, howlinmadmurfdoc said: They're PROFESSIONAL footballers, it's about time they started acting like it. Correct, and the big time charlie first teamers.
howlinmadmurfdoc Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 1 minute ago, Matt said: Correct, and the big time charlie first teamers. Yeah, but I won't start ranting on those. As I don't think I'll be able to stop myself.
Matt Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 8 minutes ago, howlinmadmurfdoc said: Yeah, but I won't start ranting on those. As I don't think I'll be able to stop myself. All i'm saying is there has been a standard, a lack of discipline and bad precident set and it all stems from Claudio letting this go for too long with the same poor, underperforming players week in, week out. The others come in, do a job and get no reward, wouldn't you feel abit miffed? So it's quite clear the first choices aren't playing for him, but not only that I think it's fairly clear to see he's upset these players now too. Bravo, Bravo But's it's alright because he laughs it off, jokes and is nice with the media!
Mark 'expert' Lawrenson Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 5 hours ago, Babylon said: He reeks of Kramaric, good control, good vision and a decent player... but lacking the physicality and pace of most premier league players. Up against your better quality player he'd struggle for me. He had some great touches of class but he goes huge periods of not being involved. He's actually quite a big lad, a bit more strength and effort and he could make it. Kramaric didn't play because the team were doing well, or at least being competitive, not so now, no excuse for not giving these 2 a try when those that have the physicality for the Premier League are playing so appallingly.
Babylon Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 2 hours ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said: Kramaric didn't play because the team were doing well, or at least being competitive, not so now, no excuse for not giving these 2 a try when those that have the physicality for the Premier League are playing so appallingly. We were bottom when Kramaric signed.
CosbehFox Posted 20 February 2017 Posted 20 February 2017 There's an argument that Saturday's game we started to play badly upon Kaputska's sub. He provided a lovely balance. An outlet someone willing to come deep. Okay hardly eye catching but lovely technique. I'd like to see him a team alongside Riyad
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.