Joe. Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 To settle this argument would you play Elvis Hammond in the starting 11 at this current time? Personally I would. If not, who would you play instead and why?
filbertway Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 Off the bench, unless its a choice between him and horsfield.
De Vries The King Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 not a chance, such limited ability and we have better options available, Hume, Horsefield, Fryatt. At most I would bring him on in the last 10 minutes of a game as he has pace that could beat a tiring back four.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I'm fed up of talking about this idiot. Here's a picture of Girls Aloud;
Leonisco Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I'm fed up of talking about this idiot. Here's a picture of Girls Aloud; :laugh: In fact, that reminds me, the Chebs thread has sunk to the second page of General Chat...
Thracian Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 Without a doubt. Horsfield has no case, Fryatt is not fully fit, Dodds is not with us and therefore we have no fit and avaiable alternative.
potter3 Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I'm the second to vote yes It's only the in the current situation though.
davieG Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I'd sooner have him than Horsefield, in fact I'd sooner have MDV back than Horsefield
Joe. Posted 20 March 2007 Author Posted 20 March 2007 That's why I said yes. Purely because there is nobody else. Fryatt not fit. Horsfield a waste of space at the minute.
JoeyB Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 He's more as an impact player. he'll never get you 20 goals a season unless he was playing in the rymands league and that still might not be possible. but what he does give you is that option of fresh, quick legs!
Wezleylowski Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 oh hes a poor player some would say worse than akinbyi, in fact most would worst touch and shooting in the league
potter3 Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I'd play him for the comedy value alone eg. THAT miss from 3 yards on Saturday, most poeple fell about laughing
Leonisco Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I voted 'no' because I'm hoping that Fryatt will be fit for Stoke, however if he's not then I'd definitely have him in over Horsfield.
Wils Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I cant belive people are talking about putting this clown in the squad let alone the starting line up?Come on how many times do people have to watch him to realise he is terrible and cannot offer anything to our club.Hes not going to get us promoted,hes never going to score goals at this level like we need him to.He has "pace" as people always say but that means nothing when he cannot dribble or finish.Dear me. Rant Over.
Shroomjuice Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I cant belive people are talking about putting this clown in the squad let alone the starting line up?Come on how many times do people have to watch him to realise he is terrible and cannot offer anything to our club.Hes not going to get us promoted,hes never going to score goals at this level like we need him to.He has "pace" as people always say but that means nothing when he cannot dribble or finish.Dear me. Rant Over. come on guys get with it, if your considering that he should even live in leicester let alone play for our team you obviously have not been watching him play. If I was as bad as him I would not even dream of showing up on saturday, he is a waste of space a poor excuse for proffesional footballer and I would not even trust him to sell the programmes as he would prob fook that up as well.
James. Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I voted 'no' because I'm hoping that Fryatt will be fit for Stoke, however if he's not then I'd definitely have him in over Horsfield. What a f**king awful choice though! Fryatt - no form, unfit, injured and a bit fat. Horsfield - old, slow, rubbish and a bit fat. Hammond - just plain bad but quite astoundingly the preferred choice! This better be a good summer.
Wils Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 Do you think when Elvis was taught how to play football they forgot to tell him the offside rule. Very possible.
Joe. Posted 20 March 2007 Author Posted 20 March 2007 The thing is, if he actually could just stay onside a few times he could score so many more goals. If he is so pacey why does he need to do it every time the ball is played to him? So very frustrating...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 Do you think when Elvis was taught how to play football they forgot to tell him the offside rule. Very possible. I think it's more possible that when Elvis was taught how to play football they forgot to teach him to play football.
Wils Posted 20 March 2007 Posted 20 March 2007 I think it's more possible that when Elvis was taught how to play football they forgot to teach him to play football. That is possible.Teams dont even need to play the offside trap,he falls into the bugger anyway.
Joe. Posted 20 March 2007 Author Posted 20 March 2007 I think it's more possible that when Elvis was taught how to play football they forgot to teach him to play football. Genius :laugh:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.