BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 They are professional footballers, they have made it. So that makes them exempt from criticism then? They get a shed load of money for being crap, I am sorry but I will have a go if they don't perform. All 3 of them are f'ckin useless. But BartonFox seems to be a professional critizer because all I ever see in his posts are him critizing Leicester That is because there is so much wrong, then we get dingo's like you who defend the Club and players to the hilt while they are collectively bending you and 90% of our support over and ramming it up your wrong'un. <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Tim Davies Andrew Taylor Robert Kelly Mike Stowell Ian Miller Those five are an absolute disgrace to the proud name of Leicester City Football Club, clueless each and everyone of them. Hearty congratulations on guiding us to oblivion while lining your sky-rockets. At least Dick Turpin wore a mask. Partick McCarthey Elvis Hammond Josh Low :laugh: Professional footballers, my arse. Absolute disgrace to the profession never mind the Club. I never thought I'd live to see the day where we have a worse defender than Grant Brown, a midfielder more inept than Junior Lewis and a striker () that makes Ade Akinbiyi look like a player. Hammond is not a striker. How can anyone with his scoring record be called a striker?. But he's a perfectly useful footballer if used correctly - infinitely better than the Sylla you favour - and he's certainly not a disgrace. Hammond gives 100% every time he plays, first team or reserves, full game or substitute. He disrupts defences. He can find and make space which is so vital in today's football. If Kelly showed any idea how to get the best out of individuals it might help because although none of our first team are world beaters there are too many who are playing way below their peak and that includes McCarthy. I do think McCarthy's flawed as a centre-back and I don't think dealing with the often reactive Irish temperament to affect an improvement is necessarily easy. But he's played a bloody sight better than he's playing these days. Same as can be said about Stearman, Kisnorbo, McAuley, Maybury, Nils, Low as I understand, Fryatt and even Hammond, Hume and Welsh. Why should all these people be below their best? Fitness, confidence, belief in what they are doing?. I don't know cos I'm not party to what goes on but it's down to Kelly. First, second and last it's down to the manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Thracian.. Hammond plays up front. Whether he's terms as a striker, a forward, whatever, his goalscoring record is simply unacceptable. You have criticised Sylla in the past because he doesn't score enough goals (Sylla is a winger) but then go on to defend Hammond (a forward) who doesn't score enough either. I could almost excuse it if Hammond was expert at holding the ball up, bringing others in, playing intelligent balls, making space for others... whatever. He doesn't do any of this effectively. Get ball, head down, run then one of 1) lose ball or 2) shoot woefully wide or with no power. You talk about the technique of players being the most important thing, being able to strike a ball well, being able to read the game and bring in others... it just strikes me as so add that you support Hammond. He's an embarrassment. I'm sure he's not deliberately bad but he simply can't cut it. It was a mistake to sign him and a continued mistake and reluctance/refusal to learn every time we use him. Whether or not Hammond gives 100% is more or less immaterial because he's just not good enough. I could play and give 100%.. so could Junior Lewis, Lee Marshall, Nationwider, DavieG, Louise or Patsy Kensit but I don't hear any support to stick any of that list in the starting XI upfront. Hammond is a joke. A joke that's just not funny any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Hammond is not a striker. How can anyone with his scoring record be called a striker?. But he's a perfectly useful footballer if used correctly - infinitely better than the Sylla you favour - and he's certainly not a disgrace. Hammond gives 100% every time he plays, first team or reserves, full game or substitute. He disrupts defences. He can find and make space which is so vital in today's football. If Kelly showed any idea how to get the best out of individuals it might help because although none of our first team are world beaters there are too many who are playing way below their peak and that includes McCarthy. I do think McCarthy's flawed as a centre-back and I don't think dealing with the often reactive Irish temperament to affect an improvement is necessarily easy. But he's played a bloody sight better than he's playing these days. Same as can be said about Stearman, Kisnorbo, McAuley, Maybury, Nils, Low as I understand, Fryatt and even Hammond, Hume and Welsh. Why should all these people be below their best? Fitness, confidence, belief in what they are doing?. I don't know cos I'm not party to what goes on but it's down to Kelly. First, second and last it's down to the manager. Rubbish. He plays up front, therefore he is a striker. The fact that he doesn't score many goals doesn't make him a midfielder, it makes him a crap striker. He's never played on the wing. Isn't it square pegs and round holes and all that bollocks? How can he be "used properly" in a position he's never played before? Just because he's quick doesn't mean he's going to be able to shoot, pass, cross or tackle any better than he can at the moment. It just means he might stay onside a bit more. Which frankly would be a massive improvement as straying offside is all he ever does at the moment. I've changed my mind. Elvis Hammond. The new Jairzinho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Thracian.. Hammond plays up front. Whether he's terms as a striker, a forward, whatever, his goalscoring record is simply unacceptable. You have criticised Sylla in the past because he doesn't score enough goals (Sylla is a winger) but then go on to defend Hammond (a forward) who doesn't score enough either. I could almost excuse it if Hammond was expert at holding the ball up, bringing others in, playing intelligent balls, making space for others... whatever. He doesn't do any of this effectively. Get ball, head down, run then one of 1) lose ball or 2) shoot woefully wide or with no power. You talk about the technique of players being the most important thing, being able to strike a ball well, being able to read the game and bring in others... it just strikes me as so add that you support Hammond. He's an embarrassment. I'm sure he's not deliberately bad but he simply can't cut it. It was a mistake to sign him and a continued mistake and reluctance/refusal to learn every time we use him. Whether or not Hammond gives 100% is more or less immaterial because he's just not good enough. I could play and give 100%.. so could Junior Lewis, Lee Marshall, Nationwider, DavieG, Louise or Patsy Kensit but I don't hear any support to stick any of that list in the starting XI upfront. Hammond is a joke. A joke that's just not funny any more. Like I've said before he he'd been credited with wrongly disallowed goals his scoring record would be virtaully the same as Fryatt's and in general play he causes far more problems for defenders than the Fryatt I've seen this season. In fact I fail to understand the persistent support for Fryatt - and so little call for our alternative striker Louis Dodds who has a much wider range of finishing skills from what I've seen. If Fryatt were playing in a front three with Hume and Dodds, he wouldn't benefit the other two in any way that I can see. But Hammond would. And he would end our need to play a worthless right winger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Thracian, you do post a lot of decent stuff regarding tactics etc and the youth players... but you just make yourself a laughing stock with posts like this about Elvis Hammond. ps Fez.. you're spot on mate. I don't think he would stay onside any more though. I really don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Like I've said before he he'd been credited with wrongly disallowed goals his scoring record would be virtaully the same as Fryatt's and in general play he causes far more problems for defenders than the Fryatt I've seen this season. In fact I fail to understand the persistent support for Fryatt - and so little call for our alternative striker Louis Dodds who has a much wider range of finishing skills from what I've seen. And like myself and a few others responded to that... 1) All forwards have goals disallowed for offside. If you want to do a comparison, it has to be on like for like. His record would still be much worse than the average forward if you include all forward's disallowed goals. 2) Please tell me when these 'wrongly disallowed' goals were scored. Most of the time Elvis has had goals disallowed for offside he has actually been offside. Usually it hasn't even been close. What's the point in being able to run fast if you can't time your runs correctly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 It says a lot about people on this site that Thracian looks like he's going to end up with Most Knowledgeable About Football in those there End of Year Award things, yet his footballing philosophy for our future success is based around adapting our formation for the sake of including Elvis Hammond and attempting to persuade us that this side, with said donkey supported by two players who've never made a League appearance, could play this expansive, attacking, close controlling, Brazil of the 1970s, pass-and-move, keep-the-ball-up-the-other-end-for-90-minutes-so-the-opposition-can't-shoot, you-score-ten-we'll-score-eleven uber-Total Football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 Hammond is not a striker. How can anyone with his scoring record be called a striker?. But he's a perfectly useful footballer if used correctly - infinitely better than the Sylla you favour - and he's certainly not a disgrace. Hammond gives 100% every time he plays, first team or reserves, full game or substitute. He disrupts defences. He can find and make space which is so vital in today's football. If Kelly showed any idea how to get the best out of individuals it might help because although none of our first team are world beaters there are too many who are playing way below their peak and that includes McCarthy. I do think McCarthy's flawed as a centre-back and I don't think dealing with the often reactive Irish temperament to affect an improvement is necessarily easy. But he's played a bloody sight better than he's playing these days. Same as can be said about Stearman, Kisnorbo, McAuley, Maybury, Nils, Low as I understand, Fryatt and even Hammond, Hume and Welsh. Why should all these people be below their best? Fitness, confidence, belief in what they are doing?. I don't know cos I'm not party to what goes on but it's down to Kelly. First, second and last it's down to the manager. Oh behave yourself man. I don't agree with you over O'Grady and Porter but I respect your loyalty and faith in them as they are 'our own'. But this defence of Hammond is frankly insulting to all football fans. I have said time and time again I am no Sylla fan but at present he is by far and away our best option in right midfield. You could pick XI of us off here and we'd 'give 100%' but it doesn't mean anything, we'd get torpedoed because were not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn Claw Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 To be honest Barton why stop with McCarthy, Lowe and Hammond? I think there is more dross in the squad than that. GK - Rab Douglas Defence - Kenton or Mayberry or both, perhaps Nils & Sheehan Midfield - Johnson, Hughes, Welsh and Sylla, Williams if his workrate is as bad as I expect it to be. Attack – CoG I’d let all of the above go, lets be honest the whole side stinks. I have no time for sentiment, get rid of them all, I’d rather watch the under 15s lose than those bunch of overpaid no hopers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Oh behave yourself man. I don't agree with you over O'Grady and Porter but I respect your loyalty and faith in them as they are 'our own'. But this defence of Hammond is frankly insulting to all football fans. I have said time and time again I am no Sylla fan but at present he is by far and away our best option in right midfield. You could pick XI of us off here and we'd 'give 100%' but it doesn't mean anything, we'd get torpedoed because were not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 To be honest Barton why stop with McCarthy, Lowe and Hammond? I think there is more dross in the squad than that. GK - Rab Douglas Defence - Kenton or Mayberry or both, perhaps Nils & Sheehan Midfield - Johnson, Hughes, Welsh and Sylla, Williams if his workrate is as bad as I expect it to be. Attack – CoG I’d let all of the above go, lets be honest the whole side stinks. I have no time for sentiment, get rid of them all, I’d rather watch the under 15s lose than those bunch of overpaid no hopers This is pissing me off now, the guy hasn't figured for months yet he still gets slammed. He is a damn sight better than Henderson, if we're getting rid of any GK it should be Henderson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Oh behave yourself man. I don't agree with you over O'Grady and Porter but I respect your loyalty and faith in them as they are 'our own'. But this defence of Hammond is frankly insulting to all football fans. I have said time and time again I am no Sylla fan but at present he is by far and away our best option in right midfield. You could pick XI of us off here and we'd 'give 100%' but it doesn't mean anything, we'd get torpedoed because were not good enough. I would stay onside more than Elvis does. The worst thing about it is how many goals has he scored by beating the offside trap, sprinting clear of the defence and burying the goal in the back of the net past a hapless keeper? None. But he got fouled just as he was about to do just that at Elland Road this season, therefore this should count as an extra goal. All of Elvis's goals are tap-ins (I shall henceforth re-christen them knee-ins and arse-ins to better suit the nature of the actual contact with the ball) for which he hasn't needed to use the pace everyone drones on about all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 I would stay onside more than Elvis does. The worst thing about it is how many goals has he scored by beating the offside trap, sprinting clear of the defence and burying the goal in the back of the net past a hapless keeper? None. But he got fouled just as he was about to do just that at Elland Road this season, therefore this should count as an extra goal. All of Elvis's goals are tap-ins (I shall henceforth re-christen them knee-ins and arse-ins to better suit the nature of the actual contact with the ball) for which he hasn't needed to use the pace everyone drones on about all the time. So were one Ade Akinbiyi's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaststandtom Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Tim Davies Andrew Taylor Robert Kelly Mike Stowell Ian Miller Those five are an absolute disgrace to the proud name of Leicester City Football Club, clueless each and everyone of them. Hearty congratulations on guiding us to oblivion while lining your sky-rockets. At least Dick Turpin wore a mask. Partick McCarthey Elvis Hammond Josh Low :laugh: Professional footballers, my arse. Absolute disgrace to the profession never mind the Club. I never thought I'd live to see the day where we have a worse defender than Grant Brown, a midfielder more inept than Junior Lewis and a striker () that makes Ade Akinbiyi look like a player. Andrew Taylor? The same guy who has fought tooth and nail to bring Milan Mandaric to Leicester City and sell the club verbally and literally to him? The guy who has been chairman for just 4-5 months and has probably done more to secure City's long term future than anyone else? He is a disgrace and should leave? If his hard work pays off and Milan's deal actually goes through I hope he does leave. Safe in the knowledge his graft has paid off. Its not his fault the club is skint and the team played like donkeys yesterday. Unbelievable!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Oh behave yourself man. I don't agree with you over O'Grady and Porter but I respect your loyalty and faith in them as they are 'our own'. But this defence of Hammond is frankly insulting to all football fans. I have said time and time again I am no Sylla fan but at present he is by far and away our best option in right midfield. You could pick XI of us off here and we'd 'give 100%' but it doesn't mean anything, we'd get torpedoed because were not good enough. Sylla should find something more suited to his talents - modelling clothes or suchlike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 So were one Ade Akinbiyi's. Actually he had so many goals ruled wrongly offside that his actual goal record should read 3,481 goals in 48 games. Etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 Andrew Taylor? The same guy who has fought tooth and nail to bring Milan Mandaric to Leicester City and sell the club verbally and literally to him? The guy who has been chairman for just 4-5 months and has probably done more to secure City's long term future than anyone else? He is a disgrace and should leave? If his hard work pays off and Milan's deal actually goes through I hope he does leave. Safe in the knowledge his graft has paid off. Its not his fault the club is skint and the team played like donkeys yesterday. Unbelievable!!! Hi Andrew, how are you this afternoon? I have not read so much bollocks in a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaststandtom Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Hi Andrew, how are you this afternoon? I have not read so much bollocks in a long time. why dont you try reading your own posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilworthfox Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 They are professional footballers, they have made it. But BartonFox seems to be a professional critizer because all I ever see in his posts are him critizing Leicester no seriously whats the punchline? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 why dont you try reading your own posts Truth hurt Ronnie? Can't wait until you and the other tossers are out the door, you have done a fantastic job of making us a laughing stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaststandtom Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 Truth hurt Ronnie? Can't wait until you and the other tossers are out the door, you have done a fantastic job of making us a laughing stock. the team did that yesterday pal!!! ronnie? oh ronald mcdonald!! nah, i prefer ronnie wood!!! you're funny!! you have turned someone disagreeing with you into some kind of personal crusade!!! to be fair warren, andrew taylor has pushed hard on the milan deal and deserves all the praise if it goes through. insider info chief you see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 the team did that yesterday pal!!! ronnie? oh ronald mcdonald!! nah, i prefer ronnie wood!!! you're funny!! you have turned someone disagreeing with you into some kind of personal crusade!!! to be fair warren, andrew taylor has pushed hard on the milan deal and deserves all the praise if it goes through. insider info chief you see :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaststandtom Posted 3 December 2006 Share Posted 3 December 2006 :laugh: ah, the silent type doesnt want to rise to the bait, especially from city fans who know less than you. or maybe you could be wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 3 December 2006 Author Share Posted 3 December 2006 ah, the silent type doesnt want to rise to the bait, especially from city fans who know less than you. or maybe you could be wrong? If you call that baiting then I am insulted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.