Thracian Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 That's more like it. Some people are being far too generous. We were pure shi'ite today. I hadn't spotted that bit in Thrac's ratings about Fryatt's run. He had absolutely no-one within about thirty yards of him and three defenders round him, yet he still won a corner!! Yes he did well. Had he simply layed the ball off first touch when he got it and headed for the box he wouldn't have wasted a lot of energy for nothing and he wouldn't have demonstrated how players don't bother making runs for him sometimes cos he never passes the ball if they do. I wouldn't run across a paving slab for him.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Yes he did well. Had he simply layed the ball off first touch when he got it and headed for the box he wouldn't have wasted a lot of energy for nothing and he wouldn't have demonstrated how players don't bother making runs for him sometimes cos he never passes the ball if they do. I wouldn't run across a paving slab for him. Personally I didn't think he had a pass on but I'd have to see it again to be sure. It's a minor quibble anyway, that was the midfield most of the fans have been after for a long time and it was shite. Also, I didn't think O'Grady was any worse today than he ever has been, fitness or no fitness. The whole lot were a joke today.
Milky Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 You say Kelly has his chosen men, but you've got your 'Blue eyed boys'. <_< it's comical isn't it.
davieG Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Yes he did well. Had he simply layed the ball off first touch when he got it and headed for the box he wouldn't have wasted a lot of energy for nothing and he wouldn't have demonstrated how players don't bother making runs for him sometimes cos he never passes the ball if they do. I wouldn't run across a paving slab for him. I felt too many of our players were guilty of this today including Fryatt, COG, Levi, Hughes, Williams, Weso, Hume they all seems to go just one possession too long and then lose it. Can someone tell me what Henderson has against throwing the ball out - not once did he do it or even look like he was thinking of it and so many of his kicks resulted in Sunderland possession.
lcfc_forever Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Henderson 8 - Pulled off some good saves and the only good performance today Stearman 5 - Gave the ball away too many time McCarthy 5 - McAuley is clearly a better player Kisnorbo 6 - Not at his best Kenton 4 - Poor but felt sorry for him to come back from injury and not only have to play out of position at left back, but had to defend most of the Sunderland attacks. Positionally at fault for the first goal and Tiatto should have come on to give him support. Hughes 4 - Kept coming inside and playing the ball backwards. Gave the ball away too many times. Wesolowski 4 - Worst I've seen him play in a Leicester shirt. Does not look match fit and easily manoeuvred off the ball Williams 4 - Lazy and did not link the play well Porter 5 - Tried but Whitehead controlled him well Fryatt 6 - Beginning to look like his old self, held the ball up well but had no supply from midfield O'Grady 5 - Worked hard but no quality Subs: Hume 5 - Tried hard Cadamarteri 4 - Not effective
toonfox Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Henderson 8 Stearman 4 Kenton 2 McCarthy 6 Kisnorbo 6 Hughes 7 Williams 7 Wesolowski 7.5 Porter 5.5 Fryatt 4 O'Grady 7.7 Hume 6 Cadamarteri 6 Rob Kelly 2 - Worst manager in the chapionship get him out. You pay money to watch the same crap every week!
Eastern Fox Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Henderson 8 Kenton 4 Kisnorbo 5 McCarthy 5 Stearman 5.5 Porter 5.5 Wesolowski 5 Williams 5 Hughes 4 O'Grady 4 Fryatt 4 Hume 5.5 Cadamateri 5 O'Grady didn't look match fit at all, and Fryatt was way off the pace too. Hume made a difference when he came on, Cadamateri hopefully with more fitness with be more effective. Kelly should try Dodds against Fulham, he could hardly be any less effective than O'Grady and Fryatt. I think all the changes made it harder for the team to be effective as a unit, but some of them were necessary I guess due to tiredness. Our play up-front is a complete disaster than needs be rectified asap.
Thracian Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 I felt too many of our players were guilty of this today including Fryatt, COG, Levi, Hughes, Williams, Weso, Hume they all seems to go just one possession too long and then lose it. Can someone tell me what Henderson has against throwing the ball out - not once did he do it or even look like he was thinking of it and so many of his kicks resulted in Sunderland possession. Perhaps they're all trying to impress the new boss. It's almost as if they're more concerned with how they do as individuals rather than as a team. Anyway the sooner they pack it in the better cos the number of times we were caught in possession in deep midfield was embarrassing and it could have cost us two or three goals.
lcfc_jme Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Henderson 7.5 - if it wasn't for him we could have conceded 6 or 7 today. However he conceded twice, gifted their second goal to them and wasn't exactly too great with his kicking. Although I remember one mammoth kick which almost landed in their penalty area. Stears 5.5 - not exactly a great performance from he. He's capable of better and I'm sure he knows it. Tried getting forward but was caught in possession a lot. Had an OK defensive game, although he was ripped apart quite a bit, especially in the last 15 minutes. McCarthy 4.5 - dropping McAuley for him (if that's what happened and there isn't a hidden injury) is an absolute joke. Club captain? Fooking poor. Trying to dribble out as last man is never a good idea. Won a few headers but didn't look commanding at all. Kisnorbo 5 - not as good as he has been at times this season. Much more commanding than"Captain" McCarthy, though that isn't saying too much. Needs to improve his distribution. Solid in the air. Kenton 3 - I think a 3 is being a bit nice to him. He was a joke. Tackles were extremely reckless and wayward. Lucky he didn't clip the man at times or he'd have been given his marching orders. Should not have played today at all. Absolutely raped for the whole game. Hughes 5.5 - a half decent start but then he drifted into parts unknown. Could be much more effective. Can tell he isn't a natural right midfielder. Wesolowski 4 - well off the pace. His lack of fitness is the only thing holding him back I feel. The lack of games he has played showed today. Tried to get involved but wasn't effective and failed to stamp any authority in the middle of the park. Williams 5 - lazy as per usual. Wouldn't think he's in need of a contract any time soon would you? A couple of good passes, the rest wayward and sloppy. Again lack of fitness could be an issue. Seemed lost and got caught in possession a fair few times. Levi 4.5 - least effective I have seen him play for us. Got the ball down a few times but failed to beat his man. Didn't seem the same player, even with Williams in the team. He was also guilty of trying to dribble the ball out of defense through a crowd. I'll be kind and say a minor blip in a promising career. COG 3.5/4 - not match fit. EXTREMELY lightweight. Doesn't win enough headers for a big man. Lacks the ability required at this level. Lack of match time/fitness? So what. Not very effective at all. Fryatt 5 - more energetic than in recent times, which isn't hard to be. Some decent control and showed a bit more willingness to chase. That being said, he's still fat and nowhere near as good atm as he was last season. Regardless of the service, he's going nowhere fast because he doesn't appear to have the desire or finishing ability he once had. Subs: Cadamarteri 4.5 - not overly excited about him. Long way to go until he is sharp and match fit, that much was obvious from today. Easily looks better than Josh Low out there, managed to win a couple of headers and put a couple of balls in. Hume 4.5/5 - didn't make too much of an impact. Got the ball stuck under his feet a few times and didn't pick out the passes into space quick enough (I seem to remember one attack where he could have released Hughes? who would have been one on one). Knows he can do better, but wasn't his worst performance. Manager: Kelly 1 - Needlessly making 6 changes to the team, using players who haven't had a taste of first team football for quite a while (Kenton and COG). Some of his decisions baffled me and did NOT fill me with any confidence whatsoever. He is tactically incapable of getting us to take a game to a team and attack properly with conviction. We were the home team today apparently but the stats or the performance do not suggest anything of the sort. Out of his depth and it is hard to see when he will be able to get results out of us on a regular basis instead of only when we're faced with relegation.
Tommeh Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Henderson 7 Stearman 5 McCarthy 5 Kisnorbo 6 Kenton 5 Porter 6 Williams 6 Wesolowski 4 Hughes 7 Fryatt 6 O'Grady 5 Subs Hume 4 Cadermateri 5
Ultra Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 Henderson - 7* (saved us from a hiding, kicking still poor though) Stearman - 4 (hope the scouts weren't watching) McCarthy - 5 (well below his best) Kisnorbo - 6 (a few vital interceptions) Kenton - 4 (rusty, and VERY lucky not to be sent off) Hughes - 2 (dreadful - maybe his fan club on here can name ONE decent thing he did all afternoon) Williams - 3 (get the hell back to Forest NOW - it seems like they need you... ) Weso - 5 (not at his best, still didn't deserve to be subbed though) Porter - 5 (too busy covering for Kenton) Fryatt - 4 (one chance, horribly wasted) O'Grady - 5 (too often in Varga's pocket) Hume - 5 (jaded and uninspired) Cadamarteri - 5 (decent early touches, but well short of match fitness)
Sparky Posted 1 January 2007 Posted 1 January 2007 sunderland had far more pace , better movement , kept the ball better were better in the air and had a more potent front 2 . every aspect of the game we were outdone . for me sunderland were possibly the best side ive seen at the walkers this year , saying that we were awful Henderson 7 Kenton 4 McCarthy 4 Kisnorbo 5 Stearman 4 Hughes 5 Wesolowski 4 Williams 4 Porter 4 Fryatt 5 O'Grady 5 subs had no impact at all Hume 3 Cadamarteri 3
Hullfox Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Henderson 7 - Everyone else has said what is needed. Kenton 5 - Whilst his passing was woeful, when he tackled at least he looked as though he meant it. McCarthy 4 - Should be third choice CB Kisnorbo 5 - At least he won some challenges Stearman 4 - Someone near me said they'd seen him out on the piss on NYE. He played like it. Hughes 4 - Good engine in the first half. Anonymous thereafter Wesolowski 4 - Struggling to see what all the hype has been about. Williams 4 - Tackled back once when he lost the ball, other than that as poor as the rest. Porter 2 - Contributed very little, again was very poor when in defensive positons. I hope that his new contract has not gone to his head. If he had been Josh Low he'd have been pilloried for that effort. Fryatt 5 - Worked hard but is so lacking in self belief that I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel. O'Grady 5 - Again, hard work is not always a good substitute for ability. Hume 4 - Not an impact player, performs better over longer spells. Cadamarteri 5 - Looked no worse than his colleagues. Won more headers in 18 minutes than Josh Low has all season. Looked way short of fitness. Kelly 2 - You are only as good as your worst player. I thought it interesting that we played one of our youngest sides for this fixture and we looked like boys against men. It may well be true that if you're good enough you're old enough but quite clearly some of these youngsters are not good enough to produce.
lildave3 Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 I personally thought Weso was no worse than the others.
lcfc_jme Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 I personally thought Weso was no worse than the others. He wasn't worse than COG or Kenton, but today, he was our worst midfielder, and that is being fair. Definitely the worst I can remember seeing him play for us.
Wils Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Hendo 8 Stears 6 Mcarthy 6 Paddy K 5 Kenton 6 Hughes 6 Weso 5 Williams 5 Porter 6 Fryatt 5 Ogrady 6
Thracian Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Henderson 7 - Everyone else has said what is needed. Kenton 5 - Whilst his passing was woeful, when he tackled at least he looked as though he meant it. McCarthy 4 - Should be third choice CB Kisnorbo 5 - At least he won some challenges Stearman 4 - Someone near me said they'd seen him out on the piss on NYE. He played like it. Hughes 4 - Good engine in the first half. Anonymous thereafter Wesolowski 4 - Struggling to see what all the hype has been about. Williams 4 - Tackled back once when he lost the ball, other than that as poor as the rest. Porter 2 - Contributed very little, again was very poor when in defensive positons. I hope that his new contract has not gone to his head. If he had been Josh Low he'd have been pilloried for that effort. Fryatt 5 - Worked hard but is so lacking in self belief that I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel. O'Grady 5 - Again, hard work is not always a good substitute for ability. Hume 4 - Not an impact player, performs better over longer spells. Cadamarteri 5 - Looked no worse than his colleagues. Won more headers in 18 minutes than Josh Low has all season. Looked way short of fitness. Kelly 2 - You are only as good as your worst player. I thought it interesting that we played one of our youngest sides for this fixture and we looked like boys against men. It may well be true that if you're good enough you're old enough but quite clearly some of these youngsters are not good enough to produce. Porter worse than Kenton, Cadamarteri, O'Grady, Wesolowski. Do you work on being a wind-up merchant or does it just come naturally. As for trying to make out that youth was the reason for our demise I can assure you that Southampton was an even worse performance - as you'd probably choose not to admit if you saw it - but it is not just me who had Porter in the top two for player of the month in December. Old timer Kenton was the major weakness yesterday - how you can muster five points for him is extraordinary - he was even bad when others were trying to help him. We lost so badly because our most senior man - the sodding manager - picked such a totally unfit and indefensible team which was never going to be co-ordinated what we playing people out of position. It had nothing to do with youth. Yes, Wesolowski, O'Grady and Fryatt are young. But everyone but the manager is well aware that none of those players are properly fit any more than Cadamarteri. The sooner Kelly's gone the better.
MC Prussian Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Henderson 6 (A bunch of brilliant saves, but Connolly's goal was set-up by Hendo's odd boxplay) Kenton 3 (I think he needs more fuel or a club change) McCarthy 4 Kisnorbo 5 Stearman 5 (Had a few good scenes in the Sunderland half toward the end of the game) Hughes 6 Wesolowski 4 Williams 5 Porter 6 Fryatt 6 (should've scored one, otherwise ambiguous display; is he for or against us?) O'Grady 4 (uneffective lightweight, should rather gain some more experience with the YA) Hume 5 Cadamarteri 5 All in all, I think I'm not so much in a position for a well-balanced analysis since I only followed the game on the radio. The truth is on the pitch.
Ultra Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Porter worse than Kenton, Cadamarteri, O'Grady, Wesolowski. Do you work on being a wind-up merchant or does it just come naturally. As for trying to make out that youth was the reason for our demise I can assure you that Southampton was an even worse performance - as you'd probably choose not to admit if you saw it - but it is not just me who had Porter in the top two for player of the month in December. Old timer Kenton was the major weakness yesterday - how you can muster five points for him is extraordinary - he was even bad when others were trying to help him. We lost so badly because our most senior man - the sodding manager - picked such a totally unfit and indefensible team which was never going to be co-ordinated what we playing people out of position. It had nothing to do with youth. Yes, Wesolowski, O'Grady and Fryatt are young. But everyone but the manager is well aware that none of those players are properly fit any more than Cadamarteri. The sooner Kelly's gone the better. Of course this analysis is entirely objective and is in no way linked to the fact that Kenton was preferred to the beloved Sheehan yesterday... At the moment our main problem is that as a team we're not physically competitive enough, and haven't been all season. Unless and until we sort this out we will continue to struggle in this league.
Hullfox Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Porter worse than Kenton, Cadamarteri, O'Grady, Wesolowski. Do you work on being a wind-up merchant or does it just come naturally. It seems to come easily at times though I'm not sure it's a natural talent. As there was no talent on the field I based some of the marks on effort and for my money Porter was worse. As for trying to make out that youth was the reason for our demise I can assure you that Southampton was an even worse performance - as you'd probably choose not to admit if you saw it - but it is not just me who had Porter in the top two for player of the month in December. Where did I say it was the reason? Yesterday it was contributory. End of. By the way, yesterday was January. December is gone. Old timer Kenton was the major weakness yesterday - how you can muster five points for him is extraordinary - he was even bad when others were trying to help him. And no doubt the help was coming from let me guess.........it wouldn't be Porter would it? We lost so badly because our most senior man - the sodding manager - picked such a totally unfit and indefensible team which was never going to be co-ordinated what we playing people out of position. It had nothing to do with youth. Yes, Wesolowski, O'Grady and Fryatt are young. But everyone but the manager is well aware that none of those players are properly fit any more than Cadamarteri. The sooner Kelly's gone the better. Kelly picked the team that he thought was right for the game. He got it wrong. Partly because of his choices and partly because the bags of shit that pulled on the shirt did not produce. That includes the old stager Kenton, the captain McCarthy and yes, like it or not Thrach your beloved Levi.
Manwell Pablo Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 How is Kenton a old timer any way? If people are calling me old at 28 I wont be pleased.
Thracian Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 It seems to come easily at times though I'm not sure it's a natural talent. As there was no talent on the field I based some of the marks on effort and for my money Porter was worse. Where did I say it was the reason? Yesterday it was contributory. End of. By the way, yesterday was January. December is gone. And no doubt the help was coming from let me guess.........it wouldn't be Porter would it? Kelly picked the team that he thought was right for the game. He got it wrong. Partly because of his choices and partly because the bags of shit that pulled on the shirt did not produce. That includes the old stager Kenton, the captain McCarthy and yes, like it or not Thrach your beloved Levi. If, as you suggest, Porter was making no effort why was he forever in the back half of the field trying to help clear up one mess after another? He made lots of defensive clearances from places he should never have been and although we did very little as a team in attack, such good things as their were invariably involved Porter and even though below his best, Porter's ball retention, though worse than usual, was still generally better than most overall. The problem was nearly all his work was in negative areas and therefore his fundamental requirement was to retain possession. Fryatt had a short spell, Cadamarteri a short spell, Hughes a short spell but Porter lasted longest. You know the game so be honest. Unless we have full-backs and central midfielders to support attacks further up the field then all our forwards will be foraging deeper and deeper. Bloody hell even Hume lost the ball 30 yards from his own goal because, by that time, Williams, Weso and Hughes had finished.
lookwhaticando Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 How is Kenton a old timer any way? If people are calling me old at 28 I wont be pleased. I'm certain I've read that line before... written by you, I think. Deja vu!
Hullfox Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 If, as you suggest, Porter was making no effort why was he forever in the back half of the field trying to help clear up one mess after another? He made lots of defensive clearances from places he should never have been and although we did very little as a team in attack, such good things as their were invariably involved Porter and even though below his best, Porter's ball retention, though worse than usual, was still generally better than most overall. The problem was nearly all his work was in negative areas and therefore his fundamental requirement was to retain possession. Fryatt had a short spell, Cadamarteri a short spell, Hughes a short spell but Porter lasted longest. You know the game so be honest. Unless we have full-backs and central midfielders to support attacks further up the field then all our forwards will be foraging deeper and deeper. Bloody hell even Hume lost the ball 30 yards from his own goal because, by that time, Williams, Weso and Hughes had finished. Okay, I admit it - you're right, you've been right all along. It was Manwell's fault, he's been holding my puppy hostage till I dared express another opinion. I'm sorry.
Manwell Pablo Posted 2 January 2007 Posted 2 January 2007 Okay, I admit it - you're right, you've been right all along. It was Manwell's fault, he's been holding my puppy hostage till I dared express another opinion. I'm sorry. Muahahahaha.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.