Hullfox Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 3 months on and Keown is told he can leave the club for the second time. Here's what was said on the first occasion. ****in stupid, why put arguably our best defender on the transfer list But Keown has been excellent so there is no reason why it hasn't worked out If anybody should be on there it should be Elliott, he is costing us more than Keown and he has done nothing for us in 1.5 seasons. Again this is another example of dictatorship, Another example of how much of a shambles our club is at the minute. He's been our best defender by far this season, Dabizas and Heath have been shocking generally. ****ing farce of a club, farce of a manager, farce of a team, money grabbing shower of wankers who couldn't give two sh*ts about what the fans want. Why don't you just sell anyone else who is semi decent. He is one of the best central defenders we have , you dont transfer list him how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. to get rid of by far our best defender is madness
TrickyTrev Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Depends if it means that we are going to be keeping Dabizas, if it does I'd rather keep Keown on board until the end of the season. I think the change in opinion is because we were aiming to get into the playoffs when the original announcement was made, and we had no obviously replacements. as we are now builiding for the future and next season it seems sensible for Levein to get in younger players and maybe give Stearman a few games.
BartonFox Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Difference is the last time the Club tried to insult the intelligence of the supporters with all the bollux about Dabizas, Elliott, Heath and Stearman. Also he was playing well and was a bright light in a pile of drivel. Everyone knew what the reason was and it was to become apparent a few later, I think the vast majority of those responses were valid at the time. Now Levein has come out and said that he wants to build a younger squad and MK acknowledges that. Obviously there has been some interest from elsewhere in him and that is why this has been made public. There is now an obvious and clear attempt to develop a squad for the future and I do not think that anyone can fault that when first time round it was all done out of spite.
MADLEVEIN Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 i think keown has earned the respect of the city faithful and if he had gone the first time round it would of looked bad on leicester city f.c. at least now if any players enquired about going to leicester he could give them a better report of the club and fans. good luck to mr keown!
Hullfox Posted 25 January 2005 Author Posted 25 January 2005 Great decision, get rid and build for the FUTURE. 58852[/snapback] how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. Nice consistency there Petrescu.
Mark Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Great decision, get rid and build for the FUTURE. 58852[/snapback] how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. Nice consistency there Petrescu. 58925[/snapback] Because he is simply too old, we will be fine without him, it's not like when he's out the team we're a worse team. The last two games without him we haven't conceded a goal. The opposition were shite i admit but we have to look to the future, finally we have a manager with some sense he's realised what needs to be done, now hopefully it'll pass on to some of the supporters
Hullfox Posted 25 January 2005 Author Posted 25 January 2005 Great decision, get rid and build for the FUTURE. 58852[/snapback] how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. Nice consistency there Petrescu. 58925[/snapback] Because he is simply too old, we will be fine without him, it's not like when he's out the team we're a worse team. The last two games without him we haven't conceded a goal. The opposition were shite i admit but we have to look to the future, finally we have a manager with some sense he's realised what needs to be done, now hopefully it'll pass on to some of the supporters 58929[/snapback] But he's only three months older than when you wrote the first comment.
Who ate all the pies? Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Look if he isn't in the plans, then that's all there is to it! He's a great player, but I prefer to give some of the younger players their chance. I hope he can find first team football somewhere soon. Good luck Martin (in the unlikely event that you're reading this!!!)
Mark Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Great decision, get rid and build for the FUTURE. 58852[/snapback] how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. Nice consistency there Petrescu. 58925[/snapback] Because he is simply too old, we will be fine without him, it's not like when he's out the team we're a worse team. The last two games without him we haven't conceded a goal. The opposition were shite i admit but we have to look to the future, finally we have a manager with some sense he's realised what needs to be done, now hopefully it'll pass on to some of the supporters 58929[/snapback] But he's only three months older than when you wrote the first comment. 58930[/snapback] That was when Micky was here and we couldn't defend so it was madness then to get rid of him THEN, but we're defending better now as a team, without him, and we are reducing the age of the squad which Micky showed no intentions of doing so
Hullfox Posted 25 January 2005 Author Posted 25 January 2005 Great decision, get rid and build for the FUTURE. 58852[/snapback] how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. Nice consistency there Petrescu. 58925[/snapback] Because he is simply too old, we will be fine without him, it's not like when he's out the team we're a worse team. The last two games without him we haven't conceded a goal. The opposition were shite i admit but we have to look to the future, finally we have a manager with some sense he's realised what needs to be done, now hopefully it'll pass on to some of the supporters 58929[/snapback] But he's only three months older than when you wrote the first comment. 58930[/snapback] That was when Micky was here and we couldn't defend so it was madness then to get rid of him THEN, but we're defending better now as a team, without him, and we are reducing the age of the squad which Micky showed no intentions of doing so 58940[/snapback] Ahhh I see, it was because it was Micky made the decision that it was wrong. I understand now.
Mark Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Great decision, get rid and build for the FUTURE. 58852[/snapback] how can you get rid of one of the most successful defenders this country has ever had to offer, in this division he is a class above the rest. Nice consistency there Petrescu. 58925[/snapback] Because he is simply too old, we will be fine without him, it's not like when he's out the team we're a worse team. The last two games without him we haven't conceded a goal. The opposition were shite i admit but we have to look to the future, finally we have a manager with some sense he's realised what needs to be done, now hopefully it'll pass on to some of the supporters 58929[/snapback] But he's only three months older than when you wrote the first comment. 58930[/snapback] That was when Micky was here and we couldn't defend so it was madness then to get rid of him THEN, but we're defending better now as a team, without him, and we are reducing the age of the squad which Micky showed no intentions of doing so 58940[/snapback] Ahhh I see, it was because it was Micky made the decision that it was wrong. I understand now. 58945[/snapback] You must have only read the first 6 words of that as I gave reasons...
Who ate all the pies? Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 I think it's more a case now that we can see the point behind Keown being released and that there is (probably) no other motive, only footballing reasons. Keown is a good defender, but he isn't at the stage now where he can play every game and we need to build a team who are able to play week in - week out. Not just letting the old guy back in the team because he's able to play for 90mins again. I think it's a good decision...although I think MA made the right decision 3 months ago (you can't have people talking about you behind your back). Anyhow no amount of arguing between each other will solve anything...so let it be!
step Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 Veteran defender Martin Keown could be the next player out of Leicester City as Craig Levein aims to further cut his wage-bill. The 38-year-old former England international will not be part of next season's new-look set-up under manager Levein and he is being made available. But the City boss was quick to dispel any notion that the situation is based on ability. He said: "Martin has done a great job for me since I came here and has proved a very good, solid professional on and off the field. "But both of us realise that it is not the way forward. I am trying to build a new, younger side and he understands that. "Our future team will be based on younger players so Martin is one player we would be looking to move on to release funds. Everyone is talking as if CL has kicking Keown out now He has not. CL has made the statment that Keown will be moving on. so the squad can be improved. Not like MA. who decieds to dump Keown, when at the time, he was probably our best player. TYhe difference between CL and MA is, CL is looking to improve the squad. MA knew it made the squad weaker yet he did not care.
Scow Posted 25 January 2005 Posted 25 January 2005 3 months on and Keown is told he can leave the club for the second time.Here's what was said on the first occasion. He's been our best defender by far this season, Dabizas and Heath have been shocking generally. 58844[/snapback] I think that's what I said first time round. We've finally got two decent full backs with a bit of pace who can cover for the centrebacks. It's a tough one because when he plays, he is without doubt our best defender - However, if it means freeing up wages for Levein to bring in another few players to rebuild, then I'd be happy with that. Ideally, I would like to see him stay until the end of the season, but we need to look forward and start to rebuild now. I still don't rate Heath and Dabizas by any stretch of the imagination, but maybe the wages freed up by Keown leaving could be used to bring in a decent centreback with a bit of pace...
Guest Posted 26 January 2005 Posted 26 January 2005 The reasons for Keown being listed by MA, and this time around are completely different, hence the differing views of the supporters.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.