Lineker, Bruno... Fryatt?

[Finnegan]

Now, first thing's first - let's not get carried away. He's not the best thing since sliced bread, yet. But now we've seen a fair bit of the lad, what do we think about Fryatt's potential as the next City striker to make an impact on the international scene? Alright, so he's not a Leicester boy, but it's fair to say Leicester could well be the first club at which he'll get the real attention of the big boys of football.

He finishes well infront of goal, has a good eye for a run to compensate his lack of blistering pace - though he's no donkey - and he grafts pretty hard. In all honesty now, keeping your heads out of the clouds, mates, how far can you see Matty Fryatt going? As far as Bruno? As far, even, as Lineker?

[Lemon Harpic]

Charlton. Or Bolton. But no higher.

I think he'd do well to match Francis Jeffers' total of England caps.

We shouldn't get carried away. He's a good player at the moment.

[Ric Flair]

First target should be England Under 21's. I rate him higher than Nugent, who hasn't scored many at all this season yet still gets called up for the Under 21's and has alot of premiership teams looking at him. Fryatt seems more of a complete player than Nugent, just doesn't have his explosive pace.

[Thracian]

Fryatt will always function but he will only flourish if he gets help from other attacking players like wingers. Kelly seems to want to use wingers but deep down believes he has more chance of not losing when he suffocates the game.

He's exactly the same as Levein in this way but is more inspirational and plays with fewer weaknesses and more concentration.

He will doubtless use a winger more often as the pressure eases but will always revert to type for important matches. He talks so much about belief but his tactics suggest that, underneath, he lacks confidence and really believes that it is safer to stiffle than to unreservedly attack.

Ironically, if he doesn't change, and it will take time with the squad he's got at present, the suffocating approach will strangle his own career as it has so many others.

Sooner or later, to be a champion, he will have to show real belief.

It is hard to fully explain what I am getting at but let me use tennis as an example.

There are many promising players who have all the shots and all the technique. But, because they are afraid of making mistakes, of hitting the net or hitting the ball out, they constantly hold something back, hit the ball with too safe a margin or at threequarter pace instead of flat out.

It becomes a habit they never break and every time they are overwhelmed by the true champions because they hit the ball close to the lines and with everything they've got, good or bad. Kelly will have to do the same if he ever wants to be a winner.

[Babylon]

Fryatt will always function but he will only flourish if he gets help from other attacking players like wingers. Kelly seems to want to use wingers but deep down believes he has more chance of not losing when he suffocates the game.

He's exactly the same as Levein in this way but is more inspirational and plays with fewer weaknesses and more concentration.

He will doubtless use a winger more often as the pressure eases but will always revert to type for important matches. He talks so much about belief but his tactics suggest that, underneath, he lacks confidence and really believes that it is safer to stiffle than to unreservedly attack.

Ironically, if he doesn't change, and it will take time with the squad he's got at present, the suffocating approach will strangle his own career as it has so many others.

Sooner or later, to be a champion, he will have to show real belief.

It is hard to fully explain what I am getting at but let me use tennis as an example.

There are many promising players who have all the shots and all the technique. But, because they are afraid of making mistakes, of hitting the net or hitting the ball out, they constantly hold something back, hit the ball with too safe a margin or at threequarter pace instead of flat out.

It becomes a habit they never break and every time they are overwhelmed by the true champions because they hit the ball close to the lines and with everything they've got, good or bad. Kelly will have to do the same if he ever wants to be a winner.

Can we stay on topic with Fryatt rather than reverting to "we aren't attacking" "Kellys like Levein" "Sheehan for king".

[Thracian]

Can we stay on topic with Fryatt rather than reverting to "we aren't attacking" "Kellys like Levein" "Sheehan for king".

No problem. Fryatt will make no special impact as a centre-forward unless he gets proper support from wingers and other attackers players. Is that simple enough and to the point?

[Babylon]

No problem. Fryatt will make no special impact as a centre-forward unless he gets proper support from wingers and other attackers players. Is that simple enough and to the point?

That's fine thanks....

[Babylon]

No problem. Fryatt will make no special impact as a centre-forward unless he gets proper support from wingers and other attackers players. Is that simple enough and to the point?

Oh and I disagree.... Dean Ashton has done ok for himself playing in a shite Crewe team. Class will always stand out no matter what team they are in and what tactics are applied.

[Manwell Pablo]

Oh and I disagree.... Dean Ashton has done ok for himself playing in a shite Crewe team. Class will always stand out no matter what team they are in and what tactics are applied.

I think there is a type of striker that does need to be played alongside good wingers. Of course this is not quite as important as Thrarcian (aka Mr 1-1-8 )makes out. Ashton and Fryatt however aren't of this ilk, Fryatt can be supplied well by Hume, and the centre mids as well as being supplied from the wing. He's also the kind of player who can pounce on second balls.

[Sir Fynwy]

No problem. Fryatt will make no special impact as a centre-forward unless he gets proper support from wingers and other attackers players. Is that simple enough and to the point?

We need to sort out a strong centre midfield before reverting to wingers, Kelly has seen that we are not keeping the ball well in the centre so he plays it narrow, makes perfect sense to me. Judge how attacking he is when he can play a decent midfield pair.

[Thracian]

We need to sort out a strong centre midfield before reverting to wingers, Kelly has seen that we are not keeping the ball well in the centre so he plays it narrow, makes perfect sense to me. Judge how attacking he is when he can play a decent midfield pair.

I might lament it but I don't disagree with what you say. So how will Fryatt fare as a centre-forard in that situation. How will he get lots of goals and achieve even greater international recognition?

[Sir Fynwy]

I might lament it but I don't disagree with what you say. So how will Fryatt fare as a centre-forard in that situation. How will he get lots of goals and achieve even greater international recognition?

Do you think that the midfield won't be strengthened before next season? We have Weso to come back and will no doubt try to sign at least 2 players in the midfield (Joey's off, Tiatto's off, Williams isn't busy enough, Hughes seems to have lost a lot of pace etc.).

Why bang on about this when it is clear that most people, including Kelly, can see the problem and the club will make it a priority oin the summer.

[Ric Flair]

Fryatt will always function but he will only flourish if he gets help from other attacking players like wingers. Kelly seems to want to use wingers but deep down believes he has more chance of not losing when he suffocates the game.

He's exactly the same as Levein in this way but is more inspirational and plays with fewer weaknesses and more concentration.

He will doubtless use a winger more often as the pressure eases but will always revert to type for important matches. He talks so much about belief but his tactics suggest that, underneath, he lacks confidence and really believes that it is safer to stiffle than to unreservedly attack.

Ironically, if he doesn't change, and it will take time with the squad he's got at present, the suffocating approach will strangle his own career as it has so many others.

Sooner or later, to be a champion, he will have to show real belief.

It is hard to fully explain what I am getting at but let me use tennis as an example.

There are many promising players who have all the shots and all the technique. But, because they are afraid of making mistakes, of hitting the net or hitting the ball out, they constantly hold something back, hit the ball with too safe a margin or at threequarter pace instead of flat out.

It becomes a habit they never break and every time they are overwhelmed by the true champions because they hit the ball close to the lines and with everything they've got, good or bad. Kelly will have to do the same if he ever wants to be a winner.

What you say about Kelly is pretty ambitious at the minute given the fact that why change a winning team. All the things you say would be problems if we weren't winning games and he wasn't doing anything about it. If this begins to happen then i'll have to agree with you but one of the reasons we've won 6 out of 9 is because of the continuity in our team and they've forged a special bond. Yes, if he's played 2 out and out wingers from the start perhaps we'd have done even better and scored more of whatever but at the time of this revolution we didn't have 2 able wingers and before you say it's Kelly's fault for not bringing some in before hand I think you'll find that's beef you'll need to take up with Levein.

I want Welsh to play as he'll create more, but we're winning and it's only fair that players are picked on merit and not on obvious ability or reputation otherwise players will lose confidence and morale.

Whilst we are winning these faults you are detecting from Kelly might be true but it's folly to think he should change things after the results we've been getting.

[Thracian]

What you say about Kelly is pretty ambitious at the minute given the fact that why change a winning team. All the things you say would be problems if we weren't winning games and he wasn't doing anything about it. If this begins to happen then i'll have to agree with you but one of the reasons we've won 6 out of 9 is because of the continuity in our team and they've forged a special bond. Yes, if he's played 2 out and out wingers from the start perhaps we'd have done even better and scored more of whatever but at the time of this revolution we didn't have 2 able wingers and before you say it's Kelly's fault for not bringing some in before hand I think you'll find that's beef you'll need to take up with Levein.

I want Welsh to play as he'll create more, but we're winning and it's only fair that players are picked on merit and not on obvious ability or reputation otherwise players will lose confidence and morale.

Whilst we are winning these faults you are detecting from Kelly might be true but it's folly to think he should change things after the results we've been getting.

You're right. The results are so undeniably persuasive that we must wait for some more defeats to move forward.

I did accept that the means would justify the end when Kelly's tenure began.

But how much longer do we have to go before we start building a proper football team, with the emphasis on football? And, how much longer before Kelly gets a proper manadate to get on with that job?

I wouldn't advocate changing to two wingers straight away (not least because we've only got one) but I would have played Welsh for at least 30 minutes and wouldn't have risked him being recalled to Sunderland through lack of match practice since he arrived.

He's been largely wasted in his time here, just as Smith suggested that he was, and that, to my mind has been an opportunity wasted.

[spirefox]

Whilst I totally agree that the "get a lead and hang on to it" tactic is not what we want to see,I can't agree that playing with two "wingers" is the holy grail.For instance,when we played with Sylla and Smith(with the notable exception of the Sheff U game)the midfield was usually overun and we lost.Championship football demands a competitive midfield four,so unless your central pair are outstanding,you must have wide players who can defend effectively and those are very few and far between.

[Ric Flair]

You're right. The results are so undeniably persuasive that we must wait for some more defeats to move forward.

I did accept that the means would justify the end when Kelly's tenure began.

But how much longer do we have to go before we start building a proper football team, with the emphasis on football? And, how much longer before Kelly gets a proper manadate to get on with that job?

I wouldn't advocate changing to two wingers straight away (not least because we've only got one) but I would have played Welsh for at least 30 minutes and wouldn't have risked him being recalled to Sunderland through lack of match practice since he arrived.

He's been largely wasted in his time here, just as Smith suggested that he was, and that, to my mind has been an opportunity wasted.

Kelly hasn't experienced a rough patch yet and that's when it will become interesting to see how he reacts.

With his position still only guaranteed until the summer, I don't think he'll be planning too much in advance so if the team is winning he'll keep it the same. He did say he wants to keep things simple at the minute and i'm more than happy with that.

If one of Kelly's weaknesses is that he a) doesn't change things around when things aren't working and b) doesn't play enough attacking players then it may well become a hinderance to him and if so then he'll either have to rectify it or he'll come undone by it.

Either way, I wouldn't worry too much as of yet. What he's done here so far is working, so you'd have to argue that he'll have the answers when things go wrong aswell, if he doesn't then he won't be the right man for the job and the rest will be history.

To go from where we were 2 months ago to where we are now is astonishing and i'm sure he'll be learning all the while, I wouldn't worry too much yet.

[Ric Flair]

Whilst I totally agree that the "get a lead and hang on to it" tactic is not what we want to see,I can't agree that playing with two "wingers" is the holy grail.For instance,when we played with Sylla and Smith(with the notable exception of the Sheff U game)the midfield was usually overun and we lost.Championship football demands a competitive midfield four,so unless your central pair are outstanding,you must have wide players who can defend effectively and those are very few and far between.

One would be nice though.

Welsh does deserve a proper chance as he's shown how creative he is against Hull and Luton. Hughes and Williams have both been off form but just when you think they should be dropped they get another chance and put in match winning performances, masterstroke by Kelly or blind faith?

I like to see unchanged teams when on a winning streak, but it's safe to say that there are perhaps one or two players who haven't deserved to be playing and one or two that have.

Irrelevant if we keep winning, keeping things simple is the best bet. Levein complicated things, Kelly appears adamant he won't do that.

[Guest]

If one of Kelly's weaknesses is that he a) doesn't change things around when things aren't working and b) doesn't play enough attacking players then it may well become a hinderance to him and if so then he'll either have to rectify it or he'll come undone by it.

How can anyone suggest that? Wasn't the introduction of Welsh and O'Grady at Luton a prime example of him changing things?

It's alright banging on about attacking football, but we haven't the personnel for that, and in this division, we don't need it.

[Ric Flair]

How can anyone suggest that? Wasn't the introduction of Welsh and O'Grady at Luton a prime example of him changing things?

It's alright banging on about attacking football, but we haven't the personnel for that, and in this division, we don't need it.

I was responding to Thracian's concerns that he isn't playing wingers, which at the minute isn't a problem.

Kelly's substitutions have been more than acceptable by me. The introduction of O'Grady against Leeds was brilliant as he took the stress of our defence which meant they could play further up the pitch.

His double substitution at Luton was a masterstroke and won us the game.

I find all of his attributes top notch at the minute, it will be interesting to see how he reacts when we hit a rough patch. He managed to get us back on a 3 game winning streak after not winning for 3 games, so from what I can see he looks to be an excellent manager.

No concerns from me at the minute.

[TrickyTrev]

I don't see how wingers will help Fryatt's game, he doesn't look that good in the air. He looks at his most dangerous when we try and pass the ball through the middle due to hsi clever runs and excellent acceloration. To that measure Hume is his perfect partner.

How good is he? I have no idea yet but I am sure as hell happy that he is at Leicester.

[Thracian]

Whilst I totally agree that the "get a lead and hang on to it" tactic is not what we want to see,I can't agree that playing with two "wingers" is the holy grail.For instance,when we played with Sylla and Smith(with the notable exception of the Sheff U game)the midfield was usually overun and we lost.Championship football demands a competitive midfield four,so unless your central pair are outstanding,you must have wide players who can defend effectively and those are very few and far between.

To use two wingers would be like trying to bring back hanging but if our wingers, including our loanee, can't do the job you mention would you or someone else explain to me why the hell we sign em?

There's Sylla, Hamill, Welsh - and Ryan Smith before that - who have all been drawing presumably decent wages - and for what purpose?

It is a directive from the PFA or something that every club must sign wingers to preserve them from extinction?

You clearly grasp the modern thinking on football and the way you put it doesn't hold out much hope for an entertaining future because, if we're going to fill our team with Tiatto types why would anyone want to pay to watch?

Indeed, does that explain all the empty seats in so many grounds including ours for most of this season?.

How many were at Millwall? Just over 10,000 for a vital game and about the same at Luton the week before.

You are right in what you say, though you might reflect on why Sheffield United was different, because philosphies need to change.

* PS. I did say Sylla was an awful winger almost from day one and nothing he has done since has changed my mind. How many decent results have we had since he's been out?

With Ryan Smith, that's a different story altogether but basically wrong player, wrong club (at least now).

[Sir Fynwy]

To use two wingers would be like trying to bring back hanging but if our wingers, including our loanee, can't do the job you mention would you or someone else explain to me why the hell we sign em?

There's Sylla, Hamill, Welsh - and Ryan Smith before that - who have all been drawing presumably decent wages - and for what purpose?

It is a directive from the PFA or something that every club must sign wingers to preserve them from extinction?

You clearly grasp the modern thinking on football and the way you put it doesn't hold out much hope for an entertaining future because, if we're going to fill our team with Tiatto types why would anyone want to pay to watch?

Indeed, does that explain all the empty seats in so many grounds including ours for most of this season?.

How many were at Millwall? Just over 10,000 for a vital game and about the same at Luton the week before.

You are right in what you say, though you might reflect on why Sheffield United was different, because philosphies need to change.

* PS. I did say Sylla was an awful winger almost from day one and nothing he has done since has changed my mind. How many decent results have we had since he's been out?

With Ryan Smith, that's a different story altogether but basically wrong player, wrong club (at least now).

We need to protect the weak centre midfield so can'yt play two wingers at the moment. Stop posting the same stuff constantly and wait to see if we sort out the midfield in the summer.

[Guest]

I was responding to Thracian's concerns that he isn't playing wingers, which at the minute isn't a problem.

Yeah, I was kind of agreeing, and my post wouldn't have made sense if I didn't use yours. Having said that, it now doesn't make sense. Oh I give up!!

[TrickyTrev]

To use two wingers would be like trying to bring back hanging but if our wingers, including our loanee, can't do the job you mention would you or someone else explain to me why the hell we sign em?

There's Sylla, Hamill, Welsh - and Ryan Smith before that - who have all been drawing presumably decent wages - and for what purpose?

It is a directive from the PFA or something that every club must sign wingers to preserve them from extinction?

You clearly grasp the modern thinking on football and the way you put it doesn't hold out much hope for an entertaining future because, if we're going to fill our team with Tiatto types why would anyone want to pay to watch?

Indeed, does that explain all the empty seats in so many grounds including ours for most of this season?.

How many were at Millwall? Just over 10,000 for a vital game and about the same at Luton the week before.

You are right in what you say, though you might reflect on why Sheffield United was different, because philosphies need to change.

* PS. I did say Sylla was an awful winger almost from day one and nothing he has done since has changed my mind. How many decent results have we had since he's been out?

With Ryan Smith, that's a different story altogether but basically wrong player, wrong club (at least now).

Name me a succesful football side that plays with two wingers and not one up fornt. If you look at those who play with two upfornt; Liverpool, England, Arsenal, Man U Sometimes. They always play with at least one narrow winger to boost the centre of the pitch. If you look at the sides that play two wingers; Chelsea, Bolton, Man U on occaisions, Barcelona. These all play a 4-3-3/4-5-1 formationa nd again keeping three in the middle.

It is impossible to be competitive with only two central midfielders in the fast paced, athletic and combative game of today. Often picking two iwngers leaves them looking ineffective because they are given slow ball by a midfield that is under siege.

[Thracian]

How can anyone suggest that? Wasn't the introduction of Welsh and O'Grady at Luton a prime example of him changing things?

It's alright banging on about attacking football, but we haven't the personnel for that, and in this division, we don't need it.

As a fan you are the very lifeblood of this club but I do give thanks that you're not the manager.

Not only do we not need attacking football but you still think we could get relegated. How black do your thoughts get? <_<