Louise Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 He hasn't scored a league goal for 3 months. Being the focal point of the team, that's an unforgiveable record. I'm not just talking about record, I'm talking about what letting go of him mean says as a statement from our club. To me it says 'we've lost it'. Oh well, I suppose when Cotterill comes he could just bring Ricketts with him...
filbertway Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 That's what I thought. I honestly can't see why everyone is so happy about this, Hume, Fryatt and Elvis together have scored the same amount as MDV. Surely getting rid of your top scorer at this point is suicidal. I think de vries has been holding us back as a team and now he's gone we can play through the midfield and attack with pace.
Muz Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 I'm not just talking about record, I'm talking about what letting go of him mean says as a statement from our club. To me it says 'we've lost it'. Oh well, I suppose when Cotterill comes he could just bring Ricketts with him... He's played for England y'know
Louise Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 I think de vries has been holding us back as a team and now he's gone we can play through the midfield and attack with pace. Just what Cotterill likes....
Thracian Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 I think de vries has been holding us back as a team and now he's gone we can play through the midfield and attack with pace. I agree. And it releases money which is needed to bring in loanees.
steve_wilson101 Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 Why is a caretaker manager being allowed to make decisions like this. We'll get a new manager in in the next few days or weeks (maybe tomorrow according to other threads) and surely it should be up to him to decide what to do with the squad once he knows what he has to use. The only excuse would be if we are planning on bringing someone else in. Apparently the deadline for loan moves is March so there wasn't even any time pressure for this. Now we're left without a powerful forward at the club. De Vries might not have contributed much recently but at least he gave us another option (however an unattractive one it was at many times). We're placing an awful lot of responsibility on Fryatt given that Hume and Elvis have hardly set the place alight in the goal scoring stakes.
The Don Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 Why is a caretaker manager being allowed to make decisions like this. We'll get a new manager in in the next few days or weeks (maybe tomorrow according to other threads) and surely it should be up to him to decide what to do with the squad once he knows what he has to use. The only excuse would be if we are planning on bringing someone else in. Apparently the deadline for loan moves is March so there wasn't even any time pressure for this. Now we're left without a powerful forward at the club. De Vries might not have contributed much recently but at least he gave us another option (however an unattractive one it was at many times). We're placing an awful lot of responsibility on Fryatt given that Hume and Elvis have hardly set the place alight in the goal scoring stakes. I agree entirely!!
filbertway Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 Why is a caretaker manager being allowed to make decisions like this. We'll get a new manager in in the next few days or weeks (maybe tomorrow according to other threads) and surely it should be up to him to decide what to do with the squad once he knows what he has to use. The only excuse would be if we are planning on bringing someone else in. Apparently the deadline for loan moves is March so there wasn't even any time pressure for this. Now we're left without a powerful forward at the club. De Vries might not have contributed much recently but at least he gave us another option (however an unattractive one it was at many times). We're placing an awful lot of responsibility on Fryatt given that Hume and Elvis have hardly set the place alight in the goal scoring stakes. Maybe the new manager is already pulling the strings? De vries hardly set the world alight either
Anish Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 De Vries has done bugger all for months (excluding the Spurs game). How can people say he gave us an option? When he came on as a sub he did nothing every time, except encourage the team to play hoof. When he started he was more often than not awful. He may have made up the numbers but he simply wasn't good enough at this level. As a target man he could barely jump, let alone head the ball, and he was painfully slow. I bet most defenders loved playing against him in this division.
filbertway Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 De Vries has done bugger all for months (excluding the Spurs game). How can people say he gave us an option? When he came on as a sub he did nothing every time, except encourage the team to play hoof. When he started he was more often than not awful. He may have made up the numbers but he simply wasn't good enough at this level. As a target man he could barely jump, let alone head the ball, and he was painfully slow. I bet most defenders loved playing against him in this division. couldn't agree more
DaveyJ Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 De Vries has done bugger all for months (excluding the Spurs game). How can people say he gave us an option? When he came on as a sub he did nothing every time, except encourage the team to play hoof. When he started he was more often than not awful. He may have made up the numbers but he simply wasn't good enough at this level. As a target man he could barely jump, let alone head the ball, and he was painfully slow. I bet most defenders loved playing against him in this division. Too true. With Hume Fryatt Hammond and O'Grady there is no need for us to worry. They probabaly realised that a new manager will want to get cover in defence or on the wing this can be done up until march.
Syko Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 I know he's still on the way back but LEE MORRIS!! he's still on his way back and still can hit the back of the net. Yes i know hes not the same player but hes still a striker
Leicester_Mad Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 I think de vries has been holding us back as a team and now he's gone we can play through the midfield and attack with pace. but will we? A team with no confidence wont be able to suddenly transform into this all conquering fast attacking Chelseaesque side?
LCFC UK Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 Why is a caretaker manager being allowed to make decisions like this. We'll get a new manager in in the next few days or weeks (maybe tomorrow according to other threads) and surely it should be up to him to decide what to do with the squad once he knows what he has to use. The only excuse would be if we are planning on bringing someone else in. Apparently the deadline for loan moves is March so there wasn't even any time pressure for this. Now we're left without a powerful forward at the club. De Vries might not have contributed much recently but at least he gave us another option (however an unattractive one it was at many times). We're placing an awful lot of responsibility on Fryatt given that Hume and Elvis have hardly set the place alight in the goal scoring stakes. Agree with ya there mate, kelly will sell all our players and fock off! Caretaker manager Rob Kelly said: "Mark plays in the one area of the pitch in which we have got cover"
Craig Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 It won't be Kelly making the decisions, and if it is, the board will have told him he needs to cut the wages before the deadline at midnight tonite.
josh Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 The cut in wages will mean the new manager will be able to bring a player or players in on loan, depending on how much de vries was on. Could turn out to be a shrewd move
Cobbo Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 Good luck Mark, use that pace to destroy the Dutch.
Louise Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 The cut in wages will mean the new manager will be able to bring a player or players in on loan, depending on how much de vries was on. Could turn out to be a shrewd move Or it could just free up money to pay off a manager from another club, doesn't mean we'll have money to pay a loan signing.
Bluefoxtim Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 WTF WHERE HAS THIS COME FROM! Wasn't expecting this at all... BUT, this is unfair to the new manager, I can't believe that Kelly has done this without considering the new manager...
Libertine Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 WTF WHERE HAS THIS COME FROM!Wasn't expecting this at all... BUT, this is unfair to the new manager, I can't believe that Kelly has done this without considering the new manager... It was the board's decision I think.
fox123 Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 The cut in wages will mean the new manager will be able to bring a player or players in on loan, depending on how much de vries was on. Could turn out to be a shrewd move maybe they wanna use the money to pay compensation for the new manager
Craig Posted 31 January 2006 Posted 31 January 2006 WTF WHERE HAS THIS COME FROM! Wasn't expecting this at all... BUT, this is unfair to the new manager, I can't believe that Kelly has done this without considering the new manager...
Jimmy Posted 31 January 2006 Author Posted 31 January 2006 de vries has been crap all season, he is top scorer for 1 simple reason, he has played almost every minuet of every game when have had
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.