Slimani - Wants to leave

[ZeGuy]

9 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

Can you tell me why you are such a " hardcore " fan of Slimani ?  I mean he's been a flop compared to what we paid for him. What do you see in him most of us can't ?  Plus I think any dig at such a useless manager as Puel is more than justified.

 

No, I won't.

Edited 22 May 2018 by ZeGuy

[kingfox]

2 hours ago, Gerard said:

 

Puel inherited Slimani, he didn't buy him.

 

Where do you suggest Slimani plays in the team?

Slimani is a good enough option to have, whether as part of the starting 11 or as back up, look how he played in the cup games especially last season, he was outstanding in our League Cup run, then come the Man City game Puel leaves Slimani out the squad for no reason, a decision that baffled quite a few fans on here tbh.

 

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Absolutely ridiculous.

 

I like Slimani, I think he has a lot to offer. But he just doesn't fit our team, even less so if we want people comfortable on the ball. To suggest Puel wrecked his career, when he didn't even feature that much under anyone else is just moronic.

Ah the classic "He doesn't fit our team" comment. In the games he started last season he proved that he was good enough, he proved to us fans that he made improvements in his game. That game against Huddersfield was seen as a last chance saloon for Slimani, he ended up destroying them, on here fans were saying he was MOTM, fans were saying on the basis of that he deserved to stay, then all of a sudden Puel fobs him off anyway, disgusting.

Edited 22 May 2018 by kingfox

[Mark - Reading]

3 hours ago, weller54 said:

He's poor.. 

No loss whatsoever. 

Apart from the £28m we paid for the arrogant donkey; we will be lucky if we recoup £8m of it tbh 

Edited 22 May 2018 by Mark - Reading

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, kingfox said:

Ah the classic "He doesn't fit our team" comment. In the games he started last season he proved that he was good enough, he proved to us fans that he made improvements in his game. That game against Huddersfield was seen as a last chance saloon for Slimani, he ended up destroying them, on here fans were saying he was MOTM, fans were saying on the basis of that he deserved to stay, then all of a sudden Puel fobs him off anyway, disgusting.

 

It's classic because it's true. He's a number 9, we already have a no. 9 who is a 20 goal a season premier league striker. In a team that wants to try and play football, he doesn't have the consistent close ball control or passing to fit as a 10. Simple as that.

 

You are literally banging on about a game that Vardy didn't play and Slimani played as a 9 with Okazaki as the 10. That's not going to happen very often and he's not happy sitting on the bench waiting for the one game in every 20 that Vardy doesn't play.

 

I like Slimani, I've defended him plenty of times on here. But if he doesn't want to sit on the bench, there isn't much you can do about it.

[Gerard]

5 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Slimani is a good enough option to have, whether as part of the starting 11 or as back up, look how he played in the cup games especially last season, he was outstanding in our League Cup run, then come the Man City game Puel leaves Slimani out the squad for no reason, a decision that baffled quite a few fans on here tbh.

 

Ah the classic "He doesn't fit our team" comment. In the games he started last season he proved that he was good enough, he proved to us fans that he made improvements in his game. That game against Huddersfield was seen as a last chance saloon for Slimani, he ended up destroying them, on here fans were saying he was MOTM, fans were saying on the basis of that he deserved to stay, then all of a sudden Puel fobs him off anyway, disgusting.

 

Three Leicester managers and a lack of suitors for Slimani disagree with you.

 

Slimani as back up is absolutely fine but Leicester City don't pay £30m for back up players.

[kingfox]

3 minutes ago, Babylon said:

It's classic because it's true. He's a number 9, we already have a no. 9 who is a 20 goal a season premier league striker. In a team that wants to try and play football, he doesn't have the consistent close ball control or passing to fit as a 10. Simple as that.

 

You are literally banging on about a game that Vardy didn't play and Slimani played as a 9 with Okazaki as the 10. That's not going to happen very often and he's not happy sitting on the bench waiting for the one game in every 20 that Vardy doesn't play.

 

I like Slimani, I've defended him plenty of times on here. But if he doesn't want to sit on the bench, there isn't much you can do about it.

I just feel that he's been harshly treated by many, the point about not playing with Vardy is of course a valid one but in the games he played, he proved to us that there was a good player in him. You could see clear improvements in his game last season and I wasn't the only one saying that at the time, you mention his ball control, he started holding up the ball far better than what we saw of him when he first joined, his link play was excellent at times, bringing the likes of Mahrez and Okazaki into play, it worked and believe it or not we were exciting to watch.

 

And I keep banging on about that Huddersfield game for a reason, at that time we on here could sense that game was seen as a make or break for Slimani, Puel played him that day for a reason, by the end of it he was getting praise left, right and centre. Puel then fobbed him off just like he did with Dragovic from our starting 11, decisions like that are harsh, decisions like that are baffling.

 

The reason Dragovic probably won't be signing is down to Puel, if those quotes are correct then the reason Slimani wants out is down to Puel, that Babs is also true.

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, kingfox said:

I just feel that he's been harshly treated by many, the point about not playing with Vardy is of course a valid one but in the games he played, he proved to us that there was a good player in him. You could see clear improvements in his game last season and I wasn't the only one saying that at the time, you mention his ball control, he started holding up the ball far better than what we saw of him when he first joined, his link play was excellent at times, bringing the likes of Mahrez and Okazaki into play, it worked and believe it or not we were exciting to watch.

 

And I keep banging on about that Huddersfield game for a reason, at that time we on here could sense that game was seen as a make or break for Slimani, Puel played him that day for a reason, by the end of it he was getting praise left, right and centre. Puel then fobbed him off just like he did with Dragovic from our starting 11, decisions like that are harsh, decisions like that are baffling.

 

The reason Dragovic probably won't be signing is down to Puel, if those quotes are correct then the reason Slimani wants out is down to Puel, that Babs is also true.

If he persisted with Slimani in a 10 position, would we have seen the progression that we have of Iheanacho recently? He's 9 years younger and going to be our future. If it's a choice of persisting with one or the other, then surely you pick Iheanacho every time.  So the decision isn't baffling at all.

 

I agree people on here are far too harsh on Slimani, he'd be an asset to have about if he's willing to sit on the bench just covering Vardy. But he isn't happy doing so, that's not Puel's fault. That's the fault of the people who bought a No. 9 for £30m when we didn't need one.

 

Sorry, but blaming Puel is ridiculous, these players aren't happy because they aren't playing. It's simple as that, trying to make out it's a manager issue is just silly. Doesn't matter who the manager is, players want to play. That's why Puel let Slimani go on loan, because we had far too many strikers and he didn't want to keep unhappy people around. If Puel went, they'd think exactly the same about the next person if they aren't playing.

[Eagle10]

45 minutes ago, Gerard said:

Three Leicester managers and a lack of suitors for Slimani disagree with you.

 

Slimani as back up is absolutely fine but Leicester City don't pay £30m for back up players.

Lack of suitors? Maybe for the price Leicester is asking, but he has plenty of suitors, and I mean plenty.

[Gerard]

Just now, Eagle10 said:

Lack of suitors? Maybe for the price Leicester is asking, but he has plenty of suitors, and I mean plenty.

 

Give some examples of these suitors and at what price?

[Eagle10]

22 minutes ago, Babylon said:

If he persisted with Slimani in a 10 position, would we have seen the progression that we have of Iheanacho recently? He's 9 years younger and going to be our future. If it's a choice of persisting with one or the other, then surely you pick Iheanacho every time.  So the decision isn't baffling at all.

 

I agree people on here are far too harsh on Slimani, he'd be an asset to have about if he's willing to sit on the bench just covering Vardy. But he isn't happy doing so, that's not Puel's fault. That's the fault of the people who bought a No. 9 for £30m when we didn't need one.

  

Sorry, but blaming Puel is ridiculous, these players aren't happy because they aren't playing. It's simple as that, trying to make out it's a manager issue is just silly. Doesn't matter who the manager is, players want to play. That's why Puel let Slimani go on loan, because we had far too many strikers and he didn't want to keep unhappy people around. If Puel went, they'd think exactly the same about the next person if they aren't playing.

I mean if I was a Leicester fan I would prefer Nacho, but he didn't prove anything for Leicester yet. He had so many bad games I can't count, although he had a great on vs Tottenham. But in terms of who showed the most in a Leicester shirt it was Slimani. I don't know if you can't recall, but Nacho was slayed many times here. 

[Eagle10]

Just now, Gerard said:

 

Give some examples of these suitors and at what price?

I know West Ham is after him, Newcastle too, Sporting, Mónaco and some other. Just check news, the price would be like £15M or so, which is a lot less, Leicester is asking for £20M.

[Gerard]

1 minute ago, Eagle10 said:

I know West Ham is after him, Newcastle too, Sporting, Mónaco and some other. Just check news, the price would be like £15M or so, which is a lot less, Leicester is asking for £20M.

 

They were linked in January and at least three of those only wanted him on loan. I don't see anyone knocking on our door this summer to buy him.

[Eagle10]

Just now, Gerard said:

 

They were linked in January and at least three of those only wanted him on loan. I don't see anyone knocking on our door this summer to buy him.

 They still are interested, but not at that price and lets be honest he isn't worth anywhere near £20M at the moment.

[kingfox]

23 minutes ago, Babylon said:

If he persisted with Slimani in a 10 position, would we have seen the progression that we have of Iheanacho recently? He's 9 years younger and going to be our future. If it's a choice of persisting with one or the other, then surely you pick Iheanacho every time.  So the decision isn't baffling at all.

 

I agree people on here are far too harsh on Slimani, he'd be an asset to have about if he's willing to sit on the bench just covering Vardy. But he isn't happy doing so, that's not Puel's fault. That's the fault of the people who bought a No. 9 for £30m when we didn't need one.

 

Sorry, but blaming Puel is ridiculous, these players aren't happy because they aren't playing. It's simple as that, trying to make out it's a manager issue is just silly. Doesn't matter who the manager is, players want to play. That's why Puel let Slimani go on loan, because we had far too many strikers and he didn't want to keep unhappy people around. If Puel went, they'd think exactly the same about the next person if they aren't playing.

Iheanacho has hardly set the world alight Babs, as I've mentioned a lot recently, you give the likes of Iheanacho space then you'll see the best of them. In the games Slimani played he was rather similar, when he was allowed to hold the ball up and turn it was rather effective, space would open up then he would bring the likes of Albrighton, Okazaki and Mahrez into play. With Iheanacho if you cancel him out then quite frankly he's absolute garbage. Who knows how Slim would look in this system, look how we played against the likes of Swansea, West Ham, Southampton etc... sideways, sideways, sideways until we get it out wide and get a hopeful cross into the box for Vardy against three defenders, if we had Slimani or dare I say it even Ulloa, then we would have a far better chance of scoring if we had them in the box instead of just Vardy. Not having a target man came back and bit us on the arse for the second half of last season. 

 

Puel made the the decision to drop Dragovic for no reason, Puel made the decision to ship out Slimani after a performance that deserved him to stay, nobody else's.

[Babylon]

13 minutes ago, Eagle10 said:

I mean if I was a Leicester fan I would prefer Nacho, but he didn't prove anything for Leicester yet. He had so many bad games I can't count, although he had a great on vs Tottenham. But in terms of who showed the most in a Leicester shirt it was Slimani. I don't know if you can't recall, but Nacho was slayed many times here. 

i know he's not proven anything yet, but he's come on leaps and bounds in the last month or so.

[Babylon]

5 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Iheanacho has hardly set the world alight Babs, as I've mentioned a lot recently, you give the likes of Iheanacho space then you'll see the best of them. In the games Slimani played he was rather similar, when he was allowed to hold the ball up and turn it was rather effective, space would open up then he would bring the likes of Albrighton, Okazaki and Mahrez into play. With Iheanacho if you cancel him out then quite frankly he's absolute garbage. Who knows how Slim would look in this system, look how we played against the likes of Swansea, West Ham, Southampton etc... sideways, sideways, sideways until we get it out wide and get a hopeful cross into the box for Vardy against three defenders, if we had Slimani or dare I say it even Ulloa, then we would have a far better chance of scoring if we had them in the box instead of just Vardy. Not having a target man came back and bit us on the arse for the second half of last season. 

 

Puel made the the decision to drop Dragovic for no reason, Puel made the decision to ship out Slimani after a performance that deserved him to stay, nobody else's.

If we kept and played Slimani, then Iheancho would be pissed off and moaning about Puel. You can't please every player, they were both large investments, the fact one has age on his side and the other doesn't is the reason one stayed over the other. Plus the fact slim had already say on the bench for a season and clearly isn't happy playing second fiddle any more.  Nobody can deny we've not seen an improvement from Iheanacho the last month and he now looks fitter an more promising.

 

What is it you think Puel should have done? Drop Vardy? Play Slimani in the incorrect position? Not both with Iheancho?

[The Horse's Mouth]

yeah feel bad for him, considering he's considered a flop I don't think his goal return considering how many starts he has had is too shabby at all. But Kelechi is the future and Vardy is untouchable really so he's not going to get what he wants here. If we got 20 mill that would be class

[kingfox]

10 minutes ago, Babylon said:

If we kept and played Slimani, then Iheancho would be pissed off and moaning about Puel. You can't please every player, they were both large investments, the fact one has age on his side and the other doesn't is the reason one stayed over the other. Plus the fact slim had already say on the bench for a season and clearly isn't happy playing second fiddle any more.  Nobody can deny we've not seen an improvement from Iheanacho the last month and he now looks fitter an more promising.

 

What is it you think Puel should have done? Drop Vardy? Play Slimani in the incorrect position? Not both with Iheancho?

Every team though has more than two strikers, we need various options Babs, so many times in the second half of last season trying to play through Iheanacho/Okazaki with Vardy wasn't working. When teams sit back they will close the likes of Iheanacho and Okazaki with ease, with Slimani or Ulloa we would've had a better chance of winning flick ons, holding the ball up and bringing others into play. It was too much of the same formula, play through Iheanacho or Okazaki until teams cancelled them out then the only option was to pass sideways, then get crosses into the box for Vardy against three defenders, it was never going to work. If we had Slimani or Ulloa playing with Vardy in that system then call me crazy but I fully believe we would've had a better chance of creating and scoring goals.

 

The way Slimani dropped in the games he played it was like he was actually playing the number 10 role sometimes, it was effective mate, you can't deny that. You then have fans banging on about getting someone like Rondon, what's the bloody difference between having Rondon and Slimani when you're expecting them to do the same type of job.

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Every team though has more than two strikers, we need various options Babs, so many times in the second half of last season trying to play through Iheanacho/Okazaki with Vardy wasn't working. When teams sit back they will close the likes of Iheanacho and Okazaki with ease, with Slimani or Ulloa we would've had a better chance of winning flick ons, holding the ball up and bringing others into play. It was too much of the same formula, play through Iheanacho or Okazaki until teams cancelled them out then the only option was to pass sideways, then get crosses into the box for Vardy against three defenders, it was never going to work. If we had Slimani or Ulloa playing with Vardy in that system then call me crazy but I fully believe we would've had a better chance of creating and scoring goals.

 

The way Slimani dropped in the games he played it was like he was actually playing the number 10 role sometimes, it was effective mate, you can't deny that. You then have fans banging on about getting someone like Rondon, what's the bloody difference between having Rondon and Slimani when you're expecting them to do the same type of job.

Why don't you wait and see how Puel wants us to line up after he's had the chance to actually craft the team his way. I would have much preferred to have kept Slimani, but I'm not sure it would have made any difference to our season. If the manager sees no long term future here for him, then try and move him on. The loan was to put him in the shop window and hope he showed up so that we could sell him at ease in the summer and not lose too much money... that hasn't worked.

[RumbleFox]

1 hour ago, Mark - Reading said:

Apart from the £28m we paid for the arrogant donkey; we will be lucky if we recoup £8m of it tbh 

 

Where is the proof of that?

[Bob Weasel Fox]

We don’t play to his strengths 

 

sell. 

[Guest]

He runs how I walk when I've played football the night before. Sell.

[ZeGuy]

4 minutes ago, RumbleFox said:

Where is the proof of that?

You're being mean there. You know exactly from where it came out.

[Babylon]

26 minutes ago, RumbleFox said:

Where is the proof of that?

He's a "moody muslim" don't you know....

[ROB-THE-BLUE]

No more Algerian fan boys!!!!