mat_j101 Posted 14 December 2006 Author Share Posted 14 December 2006 Might be worth the gamble. I'd not pay a transfer fee for him though. Yeah i agree. We wouldnt have to if he just leaves the club tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 Won't quote your entire post but I think thats a pretty accurate appraisal of the state of play. I wouldn't go as far as to say that I would be opposed to replacing Kelly, but all too often we have ended up getting rid of a manager and have been unable to replace them with somebody better. We will never get anywhere doing that even with money. If we could get a manager lined up who would be an improvement I would be for it. I just don't like the idea of sacking the manager then going round the houses looking for a replacement, being unsuccessful and making a bad appointment because of a lack of alternatives. I think we might as well keep the average manager we have got than getting another who is not going to offer the club anything else. I agree. If we are to get rid of Kelly, we must replace him with someone far better than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 He'd be amazing for a few games then he'd fall in to the lacklustre underachieving nature of the club at the moment. Other than personal pride, there is little incentive to perform when you are working in an excuse culture. RK makes it too easy for them. Our coaches are sh it too. Hughes was quality when he arrived, look at him now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 Thats 12 players only if you bump up his signings by rumour! Geez. I think there are way too many rumours flying around at the minute. Having said that its like that on most clubs forums at the minute. In fact, from what I have heard from and read written by lots fans of the teams we were beat by in November felt that they were lucky (Norwich in particular) and that we aren't a bad side. They also thought that Levi Porter was our best player by a mile. Its an interesting comparison to compare the views of supporters who have watched the same match. As a supported who cannot make it too lots of games in a season I personally don't think Radio Leicester is a big help either. I mean does anyone else find that they think their listening to a different game when the change to the commentary of the team we are playing againsts feed? I know I certainly do. But they are the same rumours that were being used to suppport RK, I've not just dreamt them up. During RK's so called purple patches many were saying CL was more crap than was thought as it was RK responsible for all those signings rumours. People can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mancunianfox Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 But they are the same rumours that were being used to suppport RK, I've not just dreamt them up. I didn't state that you did make them up. I am well aware that you didn't. All I am saying is that alot of criticisms of RK are based on rumours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 I didn't state that you did make them up. I am well aware that you didn't. All I am saying is that alot of criticisms of RK are based on rumours. What rumours are those then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coale39 Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 I think everyone should not discuss whether or not Kelly had influence in any of CL signing because we will never know. But going on signings that hes made even with no budget, he buys sh*t. AJ, Low are two of the worst. Low 27 and AJ 32?. Old and crap. This is what we are basing our judgement on. Facts. edit: old as in not gonna improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mancunianfox Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 What rumours are those then? There are loads at the minute concerning dressing room unrest, alledgedly falling out with players, the takeover, his role in Levein's transfers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mancunianfox Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 But going on signings that hes made even with no budget, he buys sh*t. Thats a broad statement. Yes WAJ and JL are bad signings but I have yet to see anything to suggest that McAuley was a bad signing though. Competition for cheap players for this league and cheap players who are good are hard to comeby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBK Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 Thats a broad statement. Yes WAJ and JL are bad signings but I have yet to see anything to suggest that McAuley was a bad signing though. Competition for cheap players for this league and cheap players who are good are hard to comeby. Kelly's light brigade tactics and crap players = depressed fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
who-izzet Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 I think the problem Kelly faces is that no one half decent really wants to come here. We have a nice crowd but what else could encourage a decent free transfer to come here? Even Lunt turned us down for Sheff Wed! Throw abit of money into the equasion and a chairman that gained alot of respect in football and we could attract better. It's easy to forget how well he done for us last season but we can't live in the past either. I'd give him till end of season to finish in the top half with the chance to sign a few loan players. It's a tough one with Kelly and I expect Leicester is pretty much divided on this. I would like to see Martin Allen here or Mike Newell but Kelly deserves a little longer unless results don't pick up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe. Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 Matt Elliott was English. He had a Scottish grandparent (I think it was his grandmother?). Technically he was Scottish because he player for Scotlamd a few times in his career Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lildave3 Posted 14 December 2006 Share Posted 14 December 2006 Technically he was Scottish because he player for Scotlamd a few times in his career I'd say so. Vieira was born in Senegal but plays for France and we all say he's french. But we all know who the better of the two is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.