Head Honcho Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 Since we signed Ryan Smith we have played 6 games. In those six games he has played for 168 minutes and we have scored once and we have drawn all three matches. Without him we have played for 462 minutes and scored five winning three and losing once. Now I am not for one minute doubting his skill but is he necessarily a good player to have in your team. I know it's only six games but you have to admit we do seem to get the results without him. Maybe when he gets a few more starts under his belt he'll be able to dominate matches and allow us to go on and win. I dunno I'm just wondering what everbody else's thought are, because sometimes a players undoubted skill can get in the way of results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 Since we signed Ryan Smith we have played 6 games. In those six games he has played for 168 minutes and we have scored once and we have drawn all three matches. Without him we have played for 462 minutes and scored five winning three and losing once. Now I am not for one minute doubting his skill but is he necessarily a good player to have in your team. I know it's only six games but you have to admit we do seem to get the results without him. Maybe when he gets a few more starts under his belt he'll be able to dominate matches and allow us to go on and win. I dunno I'm just wondering what everbody else's thought are, because sometimes a players undoubted skill can get in the way of results. Ryan Smith has only made 3 appearances for us. It's too early to make a judgement as to whetehr he's productive enough for our team. I'd be surprised if he isn't because quite frankly he's one of the best players in the division and our best player by a country mile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 Ryan Smith has only made 3 appearances for us. It's too early to make a judgement as to whetehr he's productive enough for our team. I'd be surprised if he isn't because quite frankly he's one of the best players in the division and our best player by a country mile. AGREED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Honcho Posted 18 November 2005 Author Share Posted 18 November 2005 I never doubted the fact that he might be our best player, but will he be good for city? You've seen for yourselves that the other city players seem reluctant to give him the ball. Why is this? Maybe they think he's gonna have to prove himself in the team before they give him a free reign. What justified him getting his place back as soon as his suspension was up? We had won 3 and lost 1 without him! We were 1-0 down at Plymouth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 I never doubted the fact that he might be our best player, but will he be good for city? You've seen for yourselves that the other city players seem reluctant to give him the ball. Why is this? Maybe they think he's gonna have to prove himself in the team before they give him a free reign. What justified him getting his place back as soon as his suspension was up? We had won 3 and lost 1 without him! We were 1-0 down at Plymouth! The reason they don't give him the ball is because very few of them can pass. They would much rather spend their time hoofing the ball up to Dion, who incidently doesn't get much of the ball either as he's crap aswell. I don't think it's anything to do with their reluctance to give him the ball, I just don't think they clever enough to do so. If Gerrbrand and Hughes can get hold of the ball more often then they'll try and find Smith as they can pass the ball. The main problem is that Nissa can't pass, so when he has the ball at the back he hacks it up pitch instead of taking it forward and releasing Smith down the wing. That's another reason why Sheehan must play, he hasn't got a problem with playing 10 yard passes instead of 80 yarders like the hackers at the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 The reason they don't give him the ball is because very few of them can pass. They would much rather spend their time hoofing the ball up to Dion, who incidently doesn't get much of the ball either as he's crap aswell. I don't think it's anything to do with their reluctance to give him the ball, I just don't think they clever enough to do so. If Gerrbrand and Hughes can get hold of the ball more often then they'll try and find Smith as they can pass the ball. The main problem is that Nissa can't pass, so when he has the ball at the back he hacks it up pitch instead of taking it forward and releasing Smith down the wing. That's another reason why Sheehan must play, he hasn't got a problem with playing 10 yard passes instead of 80 yarders like the hackers at the back. Funny and true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lush Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 The reason they don't give him the ball is because very few of them can pass. They would much rather spend their time hoofing the ball up to Dion, who incidently doesn't get much of the ball either as he's crap aswell. I don't think it's anything to do with their reluctance to give him the ball, I just don't think they clever enough to do so. If Gerrbrand and Hughes can get hold of the ball more often then they'll try and find Smith as they can pass the ball. The main problem is that Nissa can't pass, so when he has the ball at the back he hacks it up pitch instead of taking it forward and releasing Smith down the wing. That's another reason why Sheehan must play, he hasn't got a problem with playing 10 yard passes instead of 80 yarders like the hackers at the back. hey Ric, joey can pass sideways, does that count or hoof it to de lump...lets "hoof" it so hume or hammond or chambo can run on with it and SHOOT. The game was designed for ground grass, not high ass lump. BREAKING NEWS: Ric thinks dubs is crap! Are you reading dublin fans? Sheehan must play, sheehan must play, aho, AHO. Because of ryan, we nearly won at derby. That lift could`ve helped us v watford. 3 games with him in 8 days coming up, how many will we win? Pick the right team and formation, and were very capable of winning 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 hey Ric, joey can pass sideways, does that count or hoof it to de lump...lets "hoof" it so hume or hammond or chambo can run on with it and SHOOT. The game was designed for ground grass, not high ass lump. BREAKING NEWS: Ric thinks dubs is crap! Are you reading dublin fans? Sheehan must play, sheehan must play, aho, AHO. Because of ryan, we nearly won at derby. That lift could`ve helped us v watford. 3 games with him in 8 days coming up, how many will we win? Pick the right team and formation, and were very capable of winning 2. To be fair Kisnorbo passes Sideways more then Joey. I wouldn't mind seeing Nissa dropped for sheehan. It wont happen with the defense not letting any goals in though <_< . Levien has found his back four for now Ryan Smith looks electric on the ball 2 out of the next 3 games. I must say Lush you're being very optomstic, I'd be extatic if we win two out of the next 3. Away at Burnely and then home to 3rd and 1st, difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcoos Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 I have only seen him in the Preston game as I no longer live in the Leicester area. I was looking forward as had heard people raving about him after the Derby game. Very disappointing at Preston... Maybe he only plays well in front of his own fans??? (maybe due to his age) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lush Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 To be fair Kisnorbo passes Sideways more then Joey. 2 out of the next 3 games. I must say Lush you're being very optomstic, I'd be extatic if we win two out of the next 3. Away at Burnely and then home to 3rd and 1st, difficult. To be fair, i think your wrong But if we play the right team and formation...were at full strength, do we wana win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 The reason they don't give him the ball is because very few of them can pass. They would much rather spend their time hoofing the ball up to Dion, who incidently doesn't get much of the ball either as he's crap aswell. I don't think it's anything to do with their reluctance to give him the ball, I just don't think they clever enough to do so. If Gerrbrand and Hughes can get hold of the ball more often then they'll try and find Smith as they can pass the ball. The main problem is that Nissa can't pass, so when he has the ball at the back he hacks it up pitch instead of taking it forward and releasing Smith down the wing. That's another reason why Sheehan must play, he hasn't got a problem with playing 10 yard passes instead of 80 yarders like the hackers at the back. Put your crash helmet on Ric. You'll get some hammer talking about putting Sheehan in the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lush Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 Put your crash helmet on Ric. You'll get some hammer talking about putting Sheehan in the team. Lets hold hands and chant in the name of sheehan. sheehan for Leicester! we want sheehan, we want sheehan he`s guna plaaaay in a minute wheeeres our sheehan gone, wheres our sheehan gone! alans here, alans there, alans every focking where, la la la laaaa, la la laaaa, la la we want sheehan, we want sheehan get him on, fock them up sheehan picks up the ball, takes on the incoming winger, knocks it one way, runs the other, oh well done, plays a one-two with young weso, nut megs the on coming defender, smith calls for it, sheehan passes and keeps on running, hes in the box, smith floats one in, AND SHEEHAN SCORES WITH AN OVER HEAD KICK, YOU`LL NEVER SEE A BETTER FINISH THAN THAT, what a player Leicester City have at LB sheehan is our hero, sheehan is our hero, la la la laaaa, la la laaaa, la la Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 We should have won at Derby and would have done but for being robbed by the linesman and ref. Picking out statistics depends on how far you want to go back but is academic anyway because you've only got to see him briefly to realise Smith is class. City haven't got many players I'd pay to see if I wasn't a fanatical fan but Smith is one, Chambers is another, then there's Sheehan and Hume cos all of em are quality footballers. Instead of worrying about whether Smith's going to be good for us we should start to worry about using his strengths, isolating him one on one as often as possible, about linking him in partnership with Hume and about getting the WHOLE team to work as an attacking unit instead of, as now, having only about six regulars players with any sort of attacking skills at all (though I don't know about Gerrbrand in this way). I highlighted this fact in August and it hasn't changed. I warned we had insufficient strikers to score enough goals and there was insufficient goalscoring backup from midfield (including the wingers) which has been patently obvious ever since. I get ridiculed for saying the full-backs need to be attackers but look at the great teams. So often their full-backs are outstanding going forward. We're blessed at City with probably the best two young attacking full-backs we've had for years and yet we hardly use them. Soon as we do we'll start scoring - like we did against Sheffield Wednesday - which was, incidentally the last time we used two attacking full-backs in the League and the last time we won by two clear goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 I have only seen him in the Preston game as I no longer live in the Leicester area. I was looking forward as had heard people raving about him after the Derby game. Very disappointing at Preston... Maybe he only plays well in front of his own fans??? (maybe due to his age) He was good at Preston when given the ball, but for the first 15 minutes when he came on he didn't even get the ball once. Once he did start receiving the ball he made things happen, won us a few corners and free-kicks. I agree he wasn't brilliant at Preston neither were any of the attacking players, but proof is in the pudding that we'll only get the best out of him if we give him the ball. At Derby he was unstoppable purely because we gave him the ball and let him do what he wanted with it. Against Southampton again he was dangerous on the ball, but the rest of the players failed to note this and enjoyed a good hoofing instead. Expect more of the same tomorrow. Get ready.................................................HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOF Enjoy it Smudger, it's an art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durnerz Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 In the one time i've seen Smith play (Southampton at home) he looked promising in parts but still has a lot to learn which is why we've taken him on loan. Give him a good run in the side and he'll become more of a consistant threat. I'd like to see him start at Burnley along with Hume as he needs a run as well, Hammonds done nothing to justify his selection however on the wing Hammond has looked impressive when i've seen him, much better than that lazy arse Sylla who should come on as a sub in the last 5mins as thats all his work rate ever seems to last for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 We should have won at Derby and would have done but for being robbed by the linesman and ref. Picking out statistics depends on how far you want to go back but is academic anyway because you've only got to see him briefly to realise the kid is class. City haven't got many players I'd pay to see if I wasn't a fanatical fan but Smith is one, Chambers is another, then there's Sheehan and Hume cos all of em are quality footballers. Instead of worrying about whether Smith's going to be good for us we should start to worry about using his strengths, isolating him one on one as often as possible, about linking him in partnership with Hume and about getting the WHOLE team to work as an attacking unit instead of, as now, having only about six regulars players with any sort of attacking skills at all (though I don't know about Gerrbrand in this way). I highlighted this fact in August and it hasn't changed. I warned we had insufficient strikers to score enough goals and there was insufficient goalscoring backup from midfield (including the wingers) which has been patently obvious ever since. I get ridiculed for saying the full-backs need to be attackers but look at the great teams. So often their full-backs are outstanding going forward. We're blessed at City with probably the best two young attacking full-backs we've had for years and yet we hardly use them. Soon as we do we'll start scoring - like we did against Sheffield Wednesday - which was, incidentally the last time we used two attacking full-backs in the League and the last time we won by two clear goals. When CL goes, whenever that maybe. Have you considered applying for his job Thracian? No but on a more serious note now, have you ever taken any coaching qualifications. You talk an awful lot of sense. More so than most on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 When CL goes, whenever that maybe. Have you considered applying for his job Thracian? No but on a more serious note now, have you ever taken any coaching qualifications. You talk an awful lot of sense. More so than most on here. For what it's worth I think a lot of people talk a lot of sense about a lot of things on this forum, indeed very few have not interested, informed or intrigued me with their points at one time or another and perhaps that is the biggest reson I support this forum rather than any other. On your other point, sadly, I think my coaching qualifications - and my body - are both well out of date now!. But thanks for the thought just the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Arrow Posted 18 November 2005 Share Posted 18 November 2005 Whover mentioned Plymouth, how could he play well there? If he tried to do a step over the ball would get left behind in the mud! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.