Thracian Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 Here is a wild concept... maybe our players are just shit and it's not just Kelly?!?!?! Forgetting our efforts last season against some of the Leagues better sides and concentrating on this season I'd say our efforts against: Fulham, Villa, West Brom, Ipswich, Sunderland (away), Southampton and Coventry, for example, don't suggest that at all. But the system inhibits the flow of the team which is why most of our football is grimly effective rather than entertaining - and there's no chance of that changing with current selection policy. And, as I've just mentioned elsewhere, within that system we forever try to play difficult passes instead of easy ones because we don't have enough creative players to demand the ball from the workhorses and who can then do something with it. Porter is the only player who passes and moves properly but he's often a bit isolated on the wing. The other one is Weso but he's injured. Johnson, Jarrett, Kisnorbo are key players in the centre and they forever give the ball away - often as soon as they get it. Tiatto is another. He wins possession wonderfully then so often squanders it by being careless or by making the wrong choice. You can't have four or five players in a team constantly doing that. Southend are no world beaters and they have no money but they passed us to death at times. Are people truly saying we can't pass as well as that if Kelly insists that is what he wants. Look at the AZ manager last night. He never once allowed his team to abandon their passing and moving style just because they were getting a hammering. It's the style that's lifted them into that company and by having faith maybe, just maybe, they did enough to save the tie (although with that defence I wouldn't be confident). We stop passing and moving the first hint of trouble - or more often the moment we take the lead. That's not lack of ability its a lack of the discipline Kelly forever talks about.
Manwell Pablo Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 Forgetting our efforts last season against some of the Leagues better sides and concentrating on this season I'd say our efforts against: Fulham, Villa, West Brom, Ipswich, Sunderland (away), Southampton and Coventry, for example, don't suggest that at all. But the system inhibits the flow of the team which is why most of our football is grimly effective rather than entertaining - and there's no chance of that changing with current selection policy. And, as I've just mentioned elsewhere, within that system we forever try to play difficult passes instead of easy ones because we don't have enough creative players to demand the ball from the workhorses and who can then do something with it. Porter is the only player who passes and moves properly but he's often a bit isolated on the wing. The other one is Weso but he's injured. Johnson, Jarrett, Kisnorbo are key players in the centre and they forever give the ball away - often as soon as they get it. Tiatto is another. He wins possession wonderfully then so often squanders it by being careless or by making the wrong choice. You can't have four or five players in a team constantly doing that. Southend are no world beaters and they have no money but they passed us to death at times. Are people truly saying we can't pass as well as that if Kelly insists that is what he wants. Look at the AZ manager last night. He never once allowed his team to abandon their passing and moving style just because they were getting a hammering. It's the style that's lifted them into that company and by having faith maybe, just maybe, they did enough to save the tie (although with that defence I wouldn't be confident). We stop passing and moving the first hint of trouble - or more often the moment we take the lead. That's not lack of ability its a lack of the discipline Kelly forever talks about. Really? I'd suggest our games against Luton, Burnley, Southend, Colchester, West Brom, Sheffield Wednesday, Hull City, Preston North End Southampton and Sunderland proves him correct.
Thracian Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 Really? I'd suggest our games against Luton, Burnley, Southend, Colchester, West Brom, Sheffield Wednesday, Hull City, Preston North End Southampton and Sunderland proves him correct. No it proves that they didn't perform with the same efficiency as in the other games when they fact that they can do it was demonstrated.
Leonisco Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 I think people are over analysing this. I wouldn't read too much into what he says to the media, I expect a lot of managers don't say what they actually mean in interviews because they don't want to give anything away.
He's not bald Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 I think people are over analysing this. I wouldn't read too much into what he says to the media, I expect a lot of managers don't say what they actually mean in interviews because they don't want to give anything away. Stop pussy footing around,Kelly is not was not and never will be good enough,he is not the future of Leicester City, we are safe from the drop now and he will be out the door in the summer and good riddance..so what he says or how he says it means naff all anymore
Anish Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 I'm loving this thread. Those that were nit-picking Kelly's interview just days ago have been served with egg on their face. It's all words at the end of the day - I couldn't care what he says in interviews as long as we get results on the pitch. That's all that matters to me.
Leonisco Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 Stop pussy footing around,Kelly is not was not and never will be good enough,he is not the future of Leicester City, we are safe from the drop now and he will be out the door in the summer and good riddance..so what he says or how he says it means naff all anymore Did I say he was?
Babylon Posted 9 March 2007 Author Posted 9 March 2007 It's all words at the end of the day - I couldn't care what he says in interviews as long as we get results on the pitch. That's all that matters to me. Exactly!!
Babylon Posted 9 March 2007 Author Posted 9 March 2007 Forgetting our efforts last season against some of the Leagues better sides and concentrating on this season I'd say our efforts against: Fulham, Villa, West Brom, Ipswich, Sunderland (away), Southampton and Coventry, for example, don't suggest that at all. Some teams always play well in big games, plenty of teams in lower divisions than us do. Doesn't mean they are Brazil in disguise, what it means is they aren't good enough to perform consistantly. Your reply is exactly why I posted what I did. We think out players are better than they are, how many have ever played well at this level or above for a large amoutn of time to make you so sure they are good enough!!
Thracian Posted 9 March 2007 Posted 9 March 2007 Some teams always play well in big games, plenty of teams in lower divisions than us do. Doesn't mean they are Brazil in disguise, what it means is they aren't good enough to perform consistantly. Your reply is exactly why I posted what I did. We think out players are better than they are, how many have ever played well at this level or above for a large amoutn of time to make you so sure they are good enough!! I don't think our system of play makes anyone look good really, except perhaps the centre-backs and, of course, the goalkeeper on occasions.
Daggers Posted 10 March 2007 Posted 10 March 2007 What's bad with those comments? Run Think Forest, run think
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.