Under

[SpacedX]

36 minutes ago, BoyJones said:

The last truly defensive full back we had was Danny Simpson. Never expected to venture over the halfway line and allowed Mahrez among others to prosper.
 

Now just about every full back can play like a winger. 

Interestingly, de Laet was playing precisely the way you describe and he was quickly dropped by Claudio  in favour of the more basic but dependable and defensively minded Simpson. Fuchs similarly displaced Schlupp in the LB position - subbed in the 2015 season opener vs Sunderland. 

Edited 2 September 2021 by Line-X

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Why's this thread still open?

[Vardinio'sCat]

18 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Why's this thread still open?

 

Under has made a good start at Marseille and we are discussing why. I guess the ex-players thread is where this belongs,

[gerblod]

18 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

 Wow, choosing a team to follow in football that will never catch on..............

 

It is a relevant question, in my opinion, with players like Under and Mahrez playing for City over the years, we have had a lot of Turkish and Algerian fans join the forum due to their passion for the national side.

 

Some have become City fans. Some are here because of their association with the player.  

 

That association can lead to bias in how you view a player.

 

But your guessing on both counts, how do you know?

 

Why is a question suppressing or winning a debate?

 

You are guessing again regarding my intent, unless you can read my mind.

 

 

Doesn't take mind-reading to infer intent, do it?

 

Your question diverted attention away from the relevant discussion - which was about whether Uender got a fair crack of the whip. 

 

The stuff about 'fanboy' supporters is a tad vacuous and demeaning. Are you really using that in the context of 'Crispin'? Since Mahrez left the fanboys have drifted off. Has there been an influx of Turkish fanboys following our Turkish contingent? I truly don't know. But 'Crispin' ain't one...imo, that is.

 

I am biased...to any situation which advances Leicester's cause. I'm biased against BR's persistent selection of Perez, but I still hope he comes good...but I very much believe BR is flogging a dead horse by now. 

 

Thank you for your stimulating comments.

[gerblod]

21 hours ago, drumbeat said:

I did too but equally sometimes thought he was trying to hard to prove the wrong things. Perhaps BR wanted to see something else; to see him contribute more - work with and for the team both defensively and offensively. Whenever I saw him play, he seemed almost one track in his desire to score - to cut in and thwack it. I think that desire clouded his judgement, and was perhaps more importantly what BR didn't want to see. 

Can't disagree. An admirable summation of a difficult situation for player and manager. I just wish BR was as objective 'across the board'.

[coolhandfox]

2 hours ago, gerblod said:

Doesn't take mind-reading to infer intent, do it?

Maybe not, but it's always an educated guess at best. 

 

2 hours ago, gerblod said:

Your question diverted attention away from the relevant discussion - which was about whether Uender got a fair crack of the whip. 

Not really. You failed to answer my question "Why is a question suppressing or winning a debate?"

 

2 hours ago, gerblod said:

The stuff about 'fanboy' supporters is a tad vacuous and demeaning. Are you really using that in the context of 'Crispin'? Since Mahrez left the fanboys have drifted off. Has there been an influx of Turkish fanboys following our Turkish contingent? I truly don't know. But 'Crispin' ain't one...imo, that is.

Yes, that word is very vacuous and demeaning, makes me wonder why you choose to use it.

 

I said, "passion for the national side", you are the only one using the "term fanboy."

 

2 hours ago, gerblod said:

I am biased...to any situation which advances Leicester's cause. I'm biased against BR's persistent selection of Perez, but I still hope he comes good...but I very much believe BR is flogging a dead horse by now. 

 

Thank you for your stimulating comments.

Good for you.

[coolhandfox]

2 hours ago, gerblod said:

Can't disagree. An admirable summation of a difficult situation for player and manager. I just wish BR was as objective 'across the board'.

How do you know his not? 

[enmac]

Having to isolate in a foreign country, apart from training couldn't have been much fun. Then not even making the bench. Must have been a miserable situation. 

[gerblod]

19 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

How do you know his not? 

By my interpretation of the empirical evidence I've observed.

 

You should busy yourself doing the same, instead of craftily asking questions that save you having to substantiate your standpoint.

[gerblod]

19 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Maybe not, but it's always an educated guess at best. 

 

Not really. You failed to answer my question "Why is a question suppressing or winning a debate?"

 

Yes, that word is very vacuous and demeaning, makes me wonder why you choose to use it.

 

I said, "passion for the national side", you are the only one using the "term fanboy."

 

Good for you.

What's this tirade about?

There are plenty more on this forum who question BR's apparent partiality. I'm more interested in his inability to solve the Perez/phantom right-winger dilemma. But that's not negative criticism - he just seems to be stuck between fielding Perez and hoping that 'solution' finally bears fruit, and bringing in players who might allow him to drop Perez.

I thought Ünder had potential - Rodgers seemingly didn't. I questioned whether Lookman had any greater potential than Ünder.

Unfortunately, in responding to your 'are you an Ünder fan or a City fan?' deviation, you've succeeded in sidetracking the real issue. You're off-topic and lovin' it, innit?

Good for you.

 

 

[coolhandfox]

3 hours ago, gerblod said:

By my interpretation of the empirical evidence I've observed.

 

You should busy yourself doing the same, instead of craftily asking questions that save you having to substantiate your standpoint.

You never answer a question, am asking questions about your standpoint not mine. 

 

So what observation brings you to that conclusion?

 

3 hours ago, gerblod said:

What's this tirade about?

You are funny.

 

3 hours ago, gerblod said:

There are plenty more on this forum who question BR's apparent partiality. I'm more interested in his inability to solve the Perez/phantom right-winger dilemma. But that's not negative criticism - he just seems to be stuck between fielding Perez and hoping that 'solution' finally bears fruit, and bringing in players who might allow him to drop Perez.

I thought Ünder had potential - Rodgers seemingly didn't. I questioned whether Lookman had any greater potential than Ünder.

Once again you dodge the question, why did you use the term fan boys?

 

Look at the terms you throw around in your posts "vacuous, "demeaning" and "tirade"

3 hours ago, gerblod said:

Unfortunately, in responding to your 'are you an Ünder fan or a City fan?' deviation, you've succeeded in sidetracking the real issue. You're off-topic and lovin' it, innit?

Good for you.

No more then you 

 

Ask yourself why are Roma so keen to move him on that they have loan him out two season running under two different managers?

 

They are also willing to let him go at the end of the season for €8.4m, €5.5M less then they paid for him. He was never more then a bit part player at Roma for 3 seasons. 

 

The season before he came to us, he only played 873 minutes in the league for Roma equivalent 9 full games 

 

In the 18/19 season he played 1.379 in the league for Roma equivalent of 15 full games 

In the 17/18 season he played 1.254 in the league for Roma equivalent of 14 full games 

 

Rodgers seemed to use the EL as an opportunity to blood and test Under paying him in every game (8 games) equivalent of 5 full games. It not like he had brilliant performances in that competition against some pretty average teams. 

 

I have no idea if Lookman has more potential then Under, but he's AT (association-trained) it is important for our PL and EL squads. We can't fit anyone else who is not AT or CT (club-trained) into those squads without moving another player on. 

 

 

Edited 4 September 2021 by coolhandfox

[Reg Vardy]

Under never looked good enough, Lookman class above…time will tell…..

[gerblod]

3 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

You never answer a question, am asking questions about your standpoint not mine. 

 

So what observation brings you to that conclusion?

 

You are funny.

 

Once again you dodge the question, why did you use the term fan boys?

 

Look at the terms you throw around in your posts "vacuous, "demeaning" and "tirade"

No more then you 

 

Ask yourself why are Roma so keen to move him on that they have loan him out two season running under two different managers?

 

They are also willing to let him go at the end of the season for €8.4m, €5.5M less then they paid for him. He was never more then a bit part player at Roma for 3 seasons. 

 

The season before he came to us, he only played 873 minutes in the league for Roma equivalent 9 full games 

 

In the 18/19 season he played 1.379 in the league for Roma equivalent of 15 full games 

In the 17/18 season he played 1.254 in the league for Roma equivalent of 14 full games 

 

Rodgers seemed to use the EL as an opportunity to blood and test Under paying him in every game (8 games) equivalent of 5 full games. It not like he had brilliant performances in that competition against some pretty average teams. 

 

I have no idea if Lookman has more potential then Under, but he's AT (association-trained) it is important for our PL and EL squads. We can't fit anyone else who is not AT or CT (club-trained) into those squads without moving another player on. 

Wear 'em down by persistence and obfuscation, eh? It's beginning to feel like an interrogation with a potential custodial sentence awaiting. I sense a little bit of the bully about you.

 

Ask yourself why City thought Ünder had potential. That answers five interminable paragraphs of statistics and biased interpretation of his performances while at Leicester.

 

I liked the cut of his jib - end of. You didn't - fair enough. Do you think that I'll be swayed by stats. They didn't have them (bar goals scored) when I were a youth. We were less scientific in our interpretation then of a player's worth.

 

I'm confused by your last para. So City are hiring players because of other considerations than their ability, is that what you're stating? 

I'm sure that such factors are taken into account, but only as relatively minor peripheral considerations. I acquiesce to your greater knowledge on that score.

I used the term 'fan-boy'  to denote the transient supporter whose allegiance is to a player and not the club. If you find it derogatory then...that's tough, I guess. You asked whether 'CrispinLA'  supported City or Ünder - which I thought was rather an impertinent suggestion. 

I trust that answers all your questions.

I'm "funny", eh? That's interesting.

 

Edited 4 September 2021 by gerblod
Spelling

[coolhandfox]

5 hours ago, gerblod said:

Wear 'em down by persistence and obfuscation, eh? It's beginning to feel like an interrogation with a potential custodial sentence awaiting. I sense a little bit of the bully about you.

 

Ask yourself why City thought Ünder had potential. That answers five interminable paragraphs of statistics and biased interpretation of his performances while at Leicester.

 

I liked the cut of his jib - end of. You didn't - fair enough. Do you think that I'll be swayed by stats. They didn't have them (bar goals scored) when I were a youth. We were less scientific in our interpretation then of a player's worth.

 

I'm confused by your last para. So City are hiring players because of other considerations than their ability, is that what you're stating? 

I'm sure that such factors are taken into account, but only as relatively minor peripheral considerations. I acquiesce to your greater knowledge on that score.

I used the term 'fan-boy'  to denote the transient supporter whose allegiance is to a player and not the club. If you find it derogatory then...that's tough, I guess. You asked whether 'CrispinLA'  supported City or Ünder - which I thought was rather an impertinent suggestion. 

I trust that answers all your questions.

I'm "funny", eh? That's interesting.

 

Have you always used projection as a defense mechanism?

Edited 4 September 2021 by coolhandfox

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

Under was bang average. Not tracking back and trying Hollywood stuff everytime he got the ball was his downfall. 

[enmac]

58 minutes ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

Under was bang average. Not tracking back and trying Hollywood stuff everytime he got the ball was his downfall. 

"Hollywood stuff." Isn't this common with players, especially forwards, who get little game time? Trying to impress? Would liked to have seen him get a regular run of games. Just look at the difference it made to Kel. 

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

Totally understand why, but seeing him cut inside and blast it over the bar from 35 yards when there's an easy over lap got a bit grating. 

[baldeagle]

Don’t understand why people are surprised he’s suddenly doing well in an average at best league 

[youngvolki]

13 hours ago, baldeagle said:

Don’t understand why people are surprised he’s suddenly doing well in an average at best league 

"average at best league"  , this just screams of the typical english supriority complex. How is the 5/6th best league in Europe "average" ...at best? A league filled with teams like PSG, Monaco, Lille , Lyon , Marseille , Rennes etc. many of whom regurlarly beat english teams on european competitions.  The Ligue 1 is  a good league overall, nobody compares it to the top dawgs like La Liga and Premier League , but that doesn't mean it's a shit league automatically.

Some people would be well advised to keep their unwarranted arrogance to themselves

[majaco]

4 minutes ago, youngvolki said:

"average at best league"  , this just screams of the typical english supriority complex. How is the 5/6th best league in Europe "average" ...at best? A league filled with teams like PSG, Monaco, Lille , Lyon , Marseille , Rennes etc. many of whom regurlarly beat english teams on european competitions.  The Ligue 1 is  a good league overall, nobody compares it to the top dawgs like La Liga and Premier League , but that doesn't mean it's a shit league automatically.

Some people would be well advised to keep their unwarranted arrogance to themselves

i'm a fan of irony too.

[Reg Vardy]

Honestly would you have him back?

[King of Gipsy Lane]

Under was 

 

UNDERWHELMING 

[FoxinNotts]

16 minutes ago, Reg Vardy said:

Honestly would you have him back?

Yes. Thought at the time we weren’t using him enough. Should have given him more game time imo. Around October last year, when he gave Vardy two assists in a row and then scored in Europe, I can’t understand why we didn’t push on with him

[baldeagle]

24 minutes ago, youngvolki said:

"average at best league"  , this just screams of the typical english supriority complex. How is the 5/6th best league in Europe "average" ...at best? A league filled with teams like PSG, Monaco, Lille , Lyon , Marseille , Rennes etc. many of whom regurlarly beat english teams on european competitions.  The Ligue 1 is  a good league overall, nobody compares it to the top dawgs like La Liga and Premier League , but that doesn't mean it's a shit league automatically.

Some people would be well advised to keep their unwarranted arrogance to themselves

Where did I say it was shit? I suggest you read it again  I said it was average.  Isn’t being the 5th or 6th average ? The 6 teams you have mentioned are exactly that , they are  only 6 teams . 20 teams make the league . And I suggest you cool you beans before insulting  somone or getting on your high horse . 

[Matt]

13 hours ago, baldeagle said:

Don’t understand why people are surprised he’s suddenly doing well in an average at best league 

The Premier League has been average at best for the atleast the last 2 years, you can guise or dress it up as much as you want that it was competitive, unpredictable, but bottom line is, it's been average, take nothing away from how good we've been but it's the reason we were in the top 4 for 2 whole seasons apart from the week that counted in consecutive years.

 

I feel this year the 'top' teams in the Premier League have got stronger and it won't be as average certainly regarding the 'top table'.