frenchy_lcfc Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 One thing I don't understand with CL is his subsitution! Why the hell did he take hammond of instead of MDV! Yeah i know you might all say "His our top scorer!" That may be the only reason! But i don't understand why CL, Leaves a player who can't win a header and always tries to win a foul and thats all he does for 90min! And look at Hammond he's got Pace, Strength and also Skill!! So why didn't he stay on. On my point where i said MDV couldn't win a header, look at Humeeee! Look at his height and he even wins header!! So anyone got any comments?
AyewJoking Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 I thought Hammond's pace caused Burnley problems in the first half and they must have been laughing when Levein replaced him with Hume who had his worst performance in a City shirt to date!
Gamesmaster Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 plus we were 0-1 down and he took an attacking player off (hamill) and put a defensive player on (gudjohnson) he should explain themsies bizare substituions
frenchy_lcfc Posted 18 October 2005 Author Posted 18 October 2005 I thought Hammond's pace caused Burnley problems in the first half and they must have been laughing when Levein replaced him with Hume who had his worst performance in a City shirt to date! Abousalutly!
cisono Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 plus we were 0-1 down and he took an attacking player off (hamill) and put a defensive player on (gudjohnson) he should explain themsies bizare substituions ehmmm out of desperation perhaps?
Jonbluefox9 Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 One thing I don't understand with CL is his subsitution! Why the hell did he take hammond of instead of MDV! Yeah i know you might all say "His our top scorer!" That may be the only reason! But i don't understand why CL, Leaves a player who can't win a header and always tries to win a foul and thats all he does for 90min! And look at Hammond he's got Pace, Strength and also Skill!! So why didn't he stay on. On my point where i said MDV couldn't win a header, look at Humeeee! Look at his height and he even wins header!! So anyone got any comments? I want to know why Sylla stayed on but Hamill was taken off? I'm yet to be impressed by Momo Sylla. Ok, he did some show-boating in a pre-season friendly against his former club and apart from a few glimpses of what he is capable of against Sheffield Wednesday, I've seen nothing from him. He doesn't seen to offer us anything defensively and until the dying stages of the game he offered us nothing going forward either. I don't like criticising individuals, as a team we were poor tonight, but he really does annoy me. I know and I think we all know what he can do but he doesn't seem willing to produce his best. I'd love to know if I'm the only person who thinks this? He may be better away from home, I haven't been to an away match yet this season, but at home I can count on one hand the amount of good things he's done.
Anish Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 The substitutions tonight made no sense at all. Johansson for Tiatto, Hume for Hammond, Joey for Hamill. Hammill was doing fairly well at the time has came off, taking a few players on and running at them. Joey was never going to do the same. De Vries was awful again, he should have come off. Although I thought Hammond was just as bad, so he can't have any complaints being brought off. The one player that should have gone off was Kisnorbo. Fair enough he breaks up attacks but he looks hopeless going forward. Offers no support to the forwards, doesn't run off the ball, looks uncomfortable on the ball. Joey should have come on much sooner for Kisnorbo.
Gamesmaster Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 I want to know why Sylla stayed on but Hamill was taken off? I'm yet to be impressed by Momo Sylla. Ok, he did some show-boating in a pre-season friendly against his former club and apart from a few glimpses of what he is capable of against Sheffield Wednesday, I've seen nothing from him. He doesn't seen to offer us anything defensively and until the dying stages of the game he offered us nothing going forward either. I don't like criticising individuals, as a team we were poor tonight, but he really does annoy me. I know and I think we all know what he can do but he doesn't seem willing to produce his best. I'd love to know if I'm the only person who thinks this? He may be better away from home, I haven't been to an away match yet this season, but at home I can count on one hand the amount of good things he's done. oh come on, it wasnt syllas fault he kept slipping over, it was raining cats n dogs
cisono Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 The one player that should have gone off was Kisnorbo. Fair enough he breaks up attacks but he looks hopeful going forward. Offers no support to the forwards, doesn't run off the ball, looks uncomfortable on the ball. Joey should have come on much sooner for Kisnorbo. I guess you meant hopeless there... (not to be picky, I am just too tired to work out if I am right)
Jonbluefox9 Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 The substitutions tonight made no sense at all. Johansson for Tiatto, Hume for Hammond, Joey for Hamill. Hammill was doing fairly well at the time has came off, taking a few players on and running at them. Joey was never going to do the same. De Vries was awful again, he should have come off. Although I thought Hammond was just as bad, so he can't have any complaints being brought off. The one player that should have gone off was Kisnorbo. Fair enough he breaks up attacks but he looks hopeful going forward. Offers no support to the forwards, doesn't run off the ball, looks uncomfortable on the ball. Joey should have come on much sooner for Kisnorbo. Not to mention that he failed to pass the ball to a blue shirted player on more than a few occasions. Was looking forward to seeing him play after some of the reviews he was given at Watford but I don't think a holding midfielder is of much use against teams like Burnley who come and sit behind the ball.
Jimmy Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 kisnorbo, MdV and Nils should of been subed all 3 were bollocks although to be fair nils is out of position
Anish Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 I guess you meant hopeless there... (not to be picky, I am just too tired to work out if I am right) Yep sorry, wasn't thinking when I was typing.
Jonbluefox9 Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 oh come on, it wasnt syllas fault he kept slipping over, it was raining cats n dogs Yeah, and it wasn't his fault that he just stood around doing nothing half of the night either. He did one little flick before half time and got brought down which got a cheer but one piece of skill doesn't make up for a half of nothing for me. CL says he can't fault the effort but I don't think Sylla was putting in maximum effort for the majority of the game. He cruises through games, if he tried he could be a very useful player. It's all ifs and buts though really.
Mark Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 Because Leicester City always employ a manager who has some kind of obsession with a big man little man combination up front. Once the change was made and they scored, the only option left to Levein was to throw Dion up front. Well if thats our Plan B
Thracian Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 Because Leicester City always employ a manager who has some kind of obsession with a big man little man combination up front. Once they scored, the only option left to Levein was to throw Dion up front. Well if thats our Plan B They should all have stayed on - been saying that for ages. Our forwards, indiviodually, are not good enough. They are NOT natural goalscorers. Time and time again I've explained that. So to get something out of them (if the club daren't play Chambers), you have to play them all - and especially near the end there when the substitution was made (see other thread). Sylla too was quite dangerous in the big push for the equaliser. Why not 3-3-4 to finish because Burnley only ever played one up front. A lasting weakness of Levein is that he's too cautious. He allows others to dictate events instead of dictating terms himself .... just look at the strolling (non-Press) start to the second half when we allowed Burnley to play us off the park. There was just no tempo. He was mugged - again.
frenchy_lcfc Posted 18 October 2005 Author Posted 18 October 2005 I think the big change that we need is for Chambers to play!! Yeah you might all say "Just cuz its your mate" No that is not the reason! I think he should play because he will change the attack completely and give defenders a bit of trouble with his PACE!!! Also i bet you the first full game he plays he will score!! So bring on the next star that the LCFC have produced!! Come on CHAMBERS!!! :clap2:
Jimmy Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 he's too young, i believe league rules dont allow him to play, though he is eligble for the cup
frenchy_lcfc Posted 18 October 2005 Author Posted 18 October 2005 But by the 1st of March we should be able to make him play!! Can we??? He'll be 16!!
teblin Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 He took Elvis off cause he is not good enough, it is really that simple at time the guy looks like he has never played football before. and the only reason he didn't get caught offside every 5 mins was cause they played so deep! Not so sure we have the answer at the club!
Jimmy Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 the minimum age is 16, so when he is, he's good enough so should be in the team
Libertine Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 the minimum age is 16, so when he is, he's good enough so should be in the team The time between now and his 16th birthday is going to drag like ****.
Jimmy Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 i say try graham, dodds or recall o'grady, the 3 we have aint doing it so its worth a try
Thracian Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 he's too young, i believe league rules dont allow him to play, though he is eligble for the cup From what I've read I think the rules DO allow him to play at present. It's only in another year or so's time that they change but I'll certainly stand corrected.
Jonbluefox9 Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 Maybe even Tommy Wright might get called back from Blackpool although I can't see it after some of the things Levein said about him at the back end of last season. Can't say I rate him myself either. I still don't feel the supply to the strikers is good enough.
Jimmy Posted 18 October 2005 Posted 18 October 2005 thrac i trust your opion, if your right then why the fock aint chambers on the bench at home atleast
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.