NDIDI

[blue army 1988]

Looks like a different player. I think he will be a big star in the future so i'm very pleased he has found form again

[blue army 1988]

Looks like a different player. I think he will be a big star in the future so i'm very pleased he has found form again

[Dan LCFC]

Was nothing stopping Puel experimenting with Ndidi behind Maddison and Silva. Don't get me wrong Silva didn't exactly look great for us but did anyone really look any good in midfield in that system? It's a flawed set up. Too easy to mark the number 10 out the game, creative responsibility shifted, in our case, to two non creative midfielders in Mendy and Ndidi.

 

Mendy's actually looked better as well. Granted he's now coming on as a sub to help see games out (which I think is his trick and for that I'd keep him in the 18 for sure). Do think Puel was unlucky in the sense he only had Tielemans for two games but lets be honest about this here, there were loads of flaws in his football and the two games Puel had Tielemans for we lost 3-1 and 1-4.

Edited 1 April 2019 by Dan LCFC

[AylestoneRaider]

On 31/03/2019 at 17:13, Swan Lesta said:

No not at all. You’ve had a constant gripe about my post in this thread and have dredged it up in an inflammatory ‘I told you so way’ but my comments were based entirely on performances in particular aspects of his play and what the manager was getting out of him. I have no problem with my comments and simply they were of their time. I’m the first to reward change, improvement and positivity and there’s a lot of that right now which finally goes beyond just being a ball winner rather than a ball player. Happy he’s ours but there will never be a point to a manager playing an individual out of their comfort zone week in week out and to that end if it continued he may as well have been sold or dropped. Glad he now has a new midfield partner and has a manager playing to his strengths.

You suggested giving him his P45. It wasn’t measured and considered it constructive criticism; it was just getting on a very good young players back in a way that really irritates me. Fortunately, neither Puel or Rogers shared your opinion and Wilf has been able to return to form and make your comments look ill informed and rash.

[Nick]

24 minutes ago, AylestoneRaider said:

You suggested giving him his P45. It wasn’t measured and considered it constructive criticism; it was just getting on a very good young players back in a way that really irritates me. Fortunately, neither Puel or Rogers shared your opinion and Wilf has been able to return to form and make your comments look ill informed and rash.

So as you are behaving like a child about a throwaway comment I’ve made in January so I’ve gone back to see why your so upset.

 

Firstly I replied to a single line of a post asking how we get a message to Claude Puel. My reply was to write the message on a post it note and send it to Finance to attach to his P45 which I was hoping would be in the post to him very soon. That’s Puel’s P45 not Ndidi’s.

 

Secondly I did have a massive issue for months with Ndidi the ball winner that gave the ball away and lacked the ability to find space to receive the ball and pass forwards and when he did get the ball somewhere near the box the whole of the East stand shouted NO at him which he got confused with the word SHOOT and put it in Row Z.

 

Thirdly I had a massive issue with Puel continuing to play him in a position which he was failing at. He may as well have put him in goal in a the 4231 as there was nothing going through the middle as he was being asked to provide the creativity, not stood where he is now in front of the back four with outlets all around.

 

Lastly, I’m still glad he’s improved, still happy he’s here and being played with some talent around him and not being expected to provide that creativity he doesn’t possess and can concentrate on what he’s good at and what I’ve never criticised him for which is winning the ball back and providing cover for Ricardo and Chilwell when the drive forward.

 

Now for the love of God would you just let this drop and stop pretending to be Wilfred’s Dad?

[AKCJ]

On 01/04/2019 at 14:05, Dan LCFC said:

Was nothing stopping Puel experimenting with Ndidi behind Maddison and Silva. Don't get me wrong Silva didn't exactly look great for us but did anyone really look any good in midfield in that system? It's a flawed set up. Too easy to mark the number 10 out the game, creative responsibility shifted, in our case, to two non creative midfielders in Mendy and Ndidi.

 

Mendy's actually looked better as well. Granted he's now coming on as a sub to help see games out (which I think is his trick and for that I'd keep him in the 18 for sure). Do think Puel was unlucky in the sense he only had Tielemans for two games but lets be honest about this here, there were loads of flaws in his football and the two games Puel had Tielemans for we lost 3-1 and 1-4.

To be fair I think I wouldn't mind it if we tried Silva again if we can't get Youri.

[Nick]

On 01/04/2019 at 14:05, Dan LCFC said:

Was nothing stopping Puel experimenting with Ndidi behind Maddison and Silva. Don't get me wrong Silva didn't exactly look great for us but did anyone really look any good in midfield in that system? It's a flawed set up. Too easy to mark the number 10 out the game, creative responsibility shifted, in our case, to two non creative midfielders in Mendy and Ndidi.

 

Mendy's actually looked better as well. Granted he's now coming on as a sub to help see games out (which I think is his trick and for that I'd keep him in the 18 for sure). Do think Puel was unlucky in the sense he only had Tielemans for two games but lets be honest about this here, there were loads of flaws in his football and the two games Puel had Tielemans for we lost 3-1 and 1-4.

[AylestoneRaider]

31 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

So as you are behaving like a child about a throwaway comment I’ve made in January so I’ve gone back to see why your so upset.

 

Firstly I replied to a single line of a post asking how we get a message to Claude Puel. My reply was to write the message on a post it note and send it to Finance to attach to his P45 which I was hoping would be in the post to him very soon. That’s Puel’s P45 not Ndidi’s.

 

Secondly I did have a massive issue for months with Ndidi the ball winner that gave the ball away and lacked the ability to find space to receive the ball and pass forwards and when he did get the ball somewhere near the box the whole of the East stand shouted NO at him which he got confused with the word SHOOT and put it in Row Z.

 

Thirdly I had a massive issue with Puel continuing to play him in a position which he was failing at. He may as well have put him in goal in a the 4231 as there was nothing going through the middle as he was being asked to provide the creativity, not stood where he is now in front of the back four with outlets all around.

 

Lastly, I’m still glad he’s improved, still happy he’s here and being played with some talent around him and not being expected to provide that creativity he doesn’t possess and can concentrate on what he’s good at and what I’ve never criticised him for which is winning the ball back and providing cover for Ricardo and Chilwell when the drive forward.

 

Now for the love of God would you just let this drop and stop pretending to be Wilfred’s Dad?

Just try and be a bit more considered. I have plenty of time for constructive criticism. Not crass remarks - hopefully you’ve learned something. Same goes for those who were mindlessly writing Maddison off. Another exceptional young player who will inevitably experience dips in form.

[Nick]

1 minute ago, AylestoneRaider said:

Just try and be a bit more considered. I have plenty of time for constructive criticism. Not crass remarks - hopefully you’ve learned something. Same goes for those who were mindlessly writing Maddison off. Another exceptional young player who will inevitably experience dips in form.

I’ve learnt nothing. My comments were fair and YOU MISREAD MY POST on page 1.

 

Seriously mate you’ve had a mare.

[AylestoneRaider]

2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I’ve learnt nothing. My comments were fair and YOU MISREAD MY POST on page 1.

 

Seriously mate you’ve had a mare.

Your post wasn’t clear and your barracking of Ndidi was consistent and very stupid. Just admit you were in the wrong and move on. He experienced a dip in form, largely due to fatigue and tactics. 

 

I suggested Wilfred Ndidi was and is a very good player. I don’t feel like I’ve had a mare, I feel that my judgement of a player seems to be ok. 

[Dahnsouff]

@AylestoneRaider @Swan Lesta

 

You guys...

 

 

 

[Nick]

5 minutes ago, AylestoneRaider said:

Your post wasn’t clear and your barracking of Ndidi was consistent and very stupid. Just admit you were in the wrong and move on. He experienced a dip in form, largely due to fatigue and tactics. 

 

I suggested Wilfred Ndidi was and is a very good player. I don’t feel like I’ve had a mare, I feel that my judgement of a player seems to be ok. 

 

I made one post in the entire thread which is the one you jumped on and it wasn’t to do with Ndidi.

 

YOU MISREAD IT

 

Subsequent posts were replying to you. That’s not consistent barracking and its not stupid.

 

Theres only one person here that’s had a mare and it’s you.

 

I have no problem with your judgement in Ndidi you’ve simply just picked the wrong target and not read a post probably, got angry and gone on a crusade... that in all fairness is the only stupid bit in all of this.

[Nicolo Barella]

On 01/04/2019 at 17:05, Dan LCFC said:

Was nothing stopping Puel experimenting with Ndidi behind Maddison and Silva. Don't get me wrong Silva didn't exactly look great for us but did anyone really look any good in midfield in that system? It's a flawed set up. Too easy to mark the number 10 out the game, creative responsibility shifted, in our case, to two non creative midfielders in Mendy and Ndidi.

 

Mendy's actually looked better as well. Granted he's now coming on as a sub to help see games out (which I think is his trick and for that I'd keep him in the 18 for sure). Do think Puel was unlucky in the sense he only had Tielemans for two games but lets be honest about this here, there were loads of flaws in his football and the two games Puel had Tielemans for we lost 3-1 and 1-4.

I think the last thing we can blame Puel for is not trying out enough formations and players. If he thought there was a chance that that would work, he would have done it. It's interesting to note that as soon as he got his hands on Tielemans, he played that formation...

[Nick]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

@AylestoneRaider @Swan Lesta

 

You guys...

 

 

 

Is the bloke at the top explaining that your heads hurt because one of you can’t bloody read and has a bee in his bonnet about people having a go at young footballers?

 

On an aside does anybody think Ghezzal should be given his P45?

 

[AylestoneRaider]

2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Is the bloke at the top explaining that your heads hurt because one of you can’t bloody read and has a bee in his bonnet about people having a go at young footballers?

 

On an aside does anybody think Ghezzal should be given his P45?

 

Now if you want to have a pop at Ghezza....

[Nick]

19 minutes ago, Nicolo Barella said:

I think the last thing we can blame Puel for is not trying out enough formations and players. If he thought there was a chance that that would work, he would have done it. It's interesting to note that as soon as he got his hands on Tielemans, he played that formation...

I’m not sure he did....

 

And Puel let’s be honest had two formations!

 

433 and 4231 and could only make the former work sitting back whilst not in possession.

 

Our last game formation was 4141 and it worked marv. 

 

?

[Dahnsouff]

 

@AylestoneRaider @Swan Lesta

 

My work here is done.

 

 

[Nick]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

 

@AylestoneRaider @Swan Lesta

 

My work here is done.

 

 

Off to Brussels now then eh?

[Nicolo Barella]

46 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I’m not sure he did....

 

And Puel let’s be honest had two formations!

 

433 and 4231 and could only make the former work sitting back whilst not in possession.

 

Our last game formation was 4141 and it worked marv. 

 

?

That's exactly what I said, as soon as he had the right personnel he went 4-1-4-1. You're right about his formations, but he tried most of the squad out in them, and in fairness there was that flexible period when he tried out the lopsided formation with Iheanacho and Maddison tucking in, he tried to implement his ideas in a fair few ways just none of them worked out. I don't think we can blame him for not trying Silva as a 10., when even now at Monaco as he's come back into form  he's a deeplying player. 

[coolhandfox]

The midfield looks more balanced with YT, JM and Ndidi.

 

Takes the pressure of Ndidi to be creative and allow him to does what he does best which is to break up play. Looked back to his best on Saturday.

[Koke]

I try not to dig players out but I'm steadily losing patience with this guy. How can a Premier League footballer be so utterly incompetent at controlling the ball and moving it on under a little bit of pressure. Great at breaking up play, bollocks at about everytging else.

 

People say Gray hasn't improved since he came here, but has Ndidi actually improved in 2 and a half years? 

[Bezzanator89]

It's when the pressure is on, that's when he crumbles. Made to look invincible over past few games but last night exposed his frailties once more, such as on the ball control and overall composure, and that frustrating ability to shoot the ball into Row Z.

[M0901]

Poor last night but a much better team with him in it. Brilliant at what he does, just needs to learn not to panic so much in possession. Hopefully Brendan instils the confidence into him. 

[st albans fox]

He should have loads of confidence after the last four games where he was allowed time and space. Last night they targeted him and he was found wanting. if Brendan had the balls to play two players who can bring the ball out then our CB (Wes) wouldn’t have to play a five yard pass to him and gain absolutely nothing.  The CB should be committing the opponent and then finding wilf in the space beyond or they should be going into that space themselves whilst wilf covers their position. 

[Bourbon Fox]