Fez of Mahrez Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Wouldn't that deserve a lower mark then? Logan - 8 - Confident and assured, will be the man that balances the books when he's sold this season Kenton - 7 - A couple of stray passes failed to dent a solid performance NEJ - 7 - Work well although he failed to see long passes that were on McAuley - 9 - A superb game, absolutely superb Paddy M - 9 - A great captain's innings Low - 6 - Let down by his lack of pace but worked very well on the line Tiatto - 8 - A couple of errors in a very good game sees the ritual slagging on the forum Williams - 7.5 - Impressed me with his desire, some poor control Johnson - 9 - Full-bloodied and ran the game in midfield, effort by the bucketload Hume - 10 - If he keeps this up we'll be selling him by January ~ Fantbloodytastic Hammond - 8 - Ran ran and ran until he could run no more, too easily dislodged from the ball mind you Stearman - 8 - With Kenton out, I'll take some more of those bananas Hughes - 2 - ...and some people have the ignorance to slag off players that actually try during a game! COG ~ not fair to comment Love it. I'd find more but the search engine is offline and this took me bloody ages via the power of Google. And how dare you "numbskulls" get behind your team with your chants for individual players. Especially top scorers who give 100% and who have had to play alongside the likes of Fryatt, Horsfield and Hammond up front this season. Shame on you.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 If only you could offer a shred of evidence for that.The facts say Hume has scored at a faster rate as supplementary striker than Fryatt has as main striker. Fryatt has injury issues, Hume does not. Hume usually remains useful when he's not scoring, Fryatt is often inconsequential. It's hard to look beyond this season because Fryatt didn't break any records last season either. Never is a big word but I cannot see any signs that Fryatt will suddenly blossom into a lethal striker next season for reasons I've already mentioned. And we need a far greater presence up front than anything he's offered so far - either this season or last. It's all abnout talent, Fryatt has it and Hume doesn't have what is needed, face it. Once again the masses know I am right and it pisses them off
Flynny Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 It's all abnout talent, Fryatt has it So why's he been serving up so much dross? If he wasn't being compared to Horsfield and Hammond he'd getting some real stick.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Love it. I'd find more but the search engine is offline and this took me bloody ages via the power of Google.And how dare you "numbskulls" get behind your team with your chants for individual players. Especially top scorers who give 100% and who have had to play alongside the likes of Fryatt, Horsfield and Hammond up front this season. Shame on you. Point missed again Fez. The numbskulls won't have a word said against Hume and no one other than Thracian is defending the likes of Hammond. Face it Iain Hume isn't good enough to figure in a top 8 team, I don't understand why people are getting their knickers in a twist about it as if those who dare to speak out are disloyal. Matyy Fryatt will score more goals in his career than Iain Hume and he'll probably end up in the Premiership, where I'd be more than suprised to see HHHHHUUUUUUUUUUUMMMEEE.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 So why's he been serving up so much dross? If he wasn't being compared to Horsfield and Hammond he'd getting some real stick. He's been f'ckn unfit Flynny. I don't agree with him on his attitude but I understand fully where it came from this season and I am not sure I wouldn't have been the same put in that situation.
Flynny Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 He's been f'ckn unfit Flynny.I don't agree with him on his attitude but I understand fully where it came from this season and I am not sure I wouldn't have been the same put in that situation. Eh, I s'pose. I see where you're coming from about Hume, but I don't entirely agree, and don't think Fryatt's that much better. He's still young, I guess, but Hume's only 23 himself. That and in a real attacking team I'd want to see Hume in midfield with two proper strikers in front of him.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Eh, I s'pose.I see where you're coming from about Hume, but I don't entirely agree, and don't think Fryatt's that much better. He's still young, I guess, but Hume's only 23 himself. That and in a real attacking team I'd want to see Hume in midfield with two proper strikers in front of him. Iain Hume will make a very nice career for himself in football and if I was him I'd bunk off to Toronto FC now and become the superstar of Canadian football. I won't subscribe to him being a midfielder as he is a forward, lets have proper midfielders playing there and not shoehorn in players out of sentiment
Flynny Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Iain Hume will make a very nice career for himself in football and if I was him I'd bunk off to Toronto FC now and become the superstar of Canadian football.I won't subscribe to him being a midfielder as he is a forward, lets have proper midfielders playing there and not shoehorn in players out of sentiment He's played midfielder before, and to me has always seemed like a slightly more sensible Tiatto with an attacking bent in the way he closes down and harries the opposition. No reason why he shouldn't head a diamond and play behind two out-and-out strikers, which Hume clearly isn't.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 He's played midfielder before, and to me has always seemed like a slightly more sensible Tiatto with an attacking bent in the way he closes down and harries the opposition. No reason why he shouldn't head a diamond and play behind two out-and-out strikers, which Hume clearly isn't. I am really trying not to go all Thracian here, but as I have said before about Hume I think his decision making is woeful and the position you talk about require excellent decision making, something I think he'll never possess. However, I do admire your thought process and you are backing up your theories which is far more than many do on here :worship:
Flynny Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 I am really trying not to go all Thracian here, but as I have said before about Hume I think his decision making is woeful and the position you talk about require excellent decision making, something I think he'll never possess.However, I do admire your thought process and you are backing up your theories which is far more than many do on here :worship: I am pretty amazing, I guess. I see where you're coming from, at any rate. I'll keep a closer eye on him on Saturday.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 I am pretty amazing, I guess. I see where you're coming from, at any rate. I'll keep a closer eye on him on Saturday. You'll see what I am talking about But don't forget to join in the Leeds baiting and finger crossing that Hull win at Cardiff and Leeds lose
filbertway Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 I'm agreed with barton on this, Hume is ok at this level, but I would say Fryatt is a better striker. Like barton says Humes decision making can be awful at time so can his shots in the box. We all saw what Fryatt can do, when he scored that goal sgainst Derby, turning the centre back then calmly putting it in the corner. If this was Hume I dont think he would have had the footballing brain to come inside and pass the ball into the net, he would msot likely have lashed at it and won a corner at best. At preston he had a good chance and jsut blasted it over, when he could and should have done better. The main reason people like Hume is because he runs around alot, which is all well and good, but too often he never has the end product we need (yes he scored 13 goals this season, I know, but how many shots/ good postions has he had/been in though?) If we want to see the best out of hume, I think he needs to play a bit deeper where he can use his ability to beat his man and create space for Fryatt (or another striker) to get into and hopefully put his chances away on a more regular basis than Hume does. Also playing deeper would allow Humew to have more longer range shots 20-25 yards, which I think or more his forté.
Thracian Posted 24 April 2007 Author Posted 24 April 2007 Point missed again Fez.The numbskulls won't have a word said against Hume and no one other than Thracian is defending the likes of Hammond. Face it Iain Hume isn't good enough to figure in a top 8 team, I don't understand why people are getting their knickers in a twist about it as if those who dare to speak out are disloyal. Matyy Fryatt will score more goals in his career than Iain Hume and he'll probably end up in the Premiership, where I'd be more than suprised to see HHHHHUUUUUUUUUUUMMMEEE. I do admire a guy who stands his corner but Matty Fryatt in the Premiership? Is there something I don't know coming up - like a brain drain of Premiership strikers to America or something?. Cos, on current form, if Fryatt plays Premiership, there's a bloody good chance for Noddy and Big Ears too. As for Hammond, he might be everything that's wrong and everyone's fall guy but he's still scored more goals than Fryatt this season.
Daggers Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Love it. I'd find more but the search engine is offline and this took me bloody ages via the power of Google. Don't get it Fezzy - am I not allowed to appreciate Hume when he played well for the team AND be critical of his team playing abilities at present? As the season has gone on he has become less and less of a team player...just head down puff puff puffing around. That's my opinion...and I'm tired of stating it over and over so I'm not going to anymore. This thread is dead to me.
potter3 Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 I'd say Fryatt is the better striker, but Hume has a higher work rate and for this reason I'd like to see him in midfield, where he can be used to better effect. I don't think his decision making is that poor, he just seems to be "blinded" by the sight of goal if it is in range.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Point missed again Fez.The numbskulls won't have a word said against Hume and no one other than Thracian is defending the likes of Hammond. Face it Iain Hume isn't good enough to figure in a top 8 team, I don't understand why people are getting their knickers in a twist about it as if those who dare to speak out are disloyal. Matyy Fryatt will score more goals in his career than Iain Hume and he'll probably end up in the Premiership, where I'd be more than suprised to see HHHHHUUUUUUUUUUUMMMEEE. I'm happy to criticise Hume. He was absolute garbage in the first couple of games of the season and has periods of four to five games at a time where he doesn't do much at all. What I think is completely ludicrous is the idea that either a) we should drop him (Daggers) or b) that he is a League One player (your good self). a) Horsfield. Cadamarteri. Hammond. (and on this season's form, Fryatt - you might blame his poor form this season on lack of fitness but he's no quicker when "fully fit" than he has been this season. Never got the pace to play in the Premiership) b) I watch a lot of League One. It's utter bellend to consider Hume a League One player. Been saying this all season but ideally Hume would be playing in midfield anyway. It's just a credit to him that he has been our number one striker all season playing in a pisspoor team full of absolute shysters when he would actually be even better playing deeper. Even if he does stay up front next season, playing in a proper team (with a proper midfield that does its job) with a designated attacking purpose rather than our embarrassing "hoof it down the channels and let Hume/Fryatt/Hammond do it all themselves" approach, Hume will be even better. I'm quite happy to write this season off as far as Fryatt's concerned and start with a blank slate next season. As it is, I'm glad we had Hume to score the goals and provide a dynamic attacking focal point. Without him this season we would be in League One next season.
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 If only you could offer a shred of evidence for that.The facts say Hume has scored at a faster rate as supplementary striker than Fryatt has as main striker. Fryatt has injury issues, Hume does not. Hume usually remains useful when he's not scoring, Fryatt is often inconsequential. It's hard to look beyond this season because Fryatt didn't break any records last season either. Never is a big word but I cannot see any signs that Fryatt will suddenly blossom into a lethal striker next season for reasons I've already mentioned. And we need a far greater presence up front than anything he's offered so far - either this season or last. Well said... stick that in your pipe Barton....
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Well said... stick that in your pipe Barton.... F'ckn shite come back and having someone else fight your battles is, well you now, a bit poofy like
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 I do admire a guy who stands his corner but Matty Fryatt in the Premiership? Is there something I don't know coming up - like a brain drain of Premiership strikers to America or something?.Cos, on current form, if Fryatt plays Premiership, there's a bloody good chance for Noddy and Big Ears too. As for Hammond, he might be everything that's wrong and everyone's fall guy but he's still scored more goals than Fryatt this season. On current form Levi Porter and Elvis Hammond are proving to be a poor as I have always said Fryatt has demonstrated last season and in recent patches he is far more acomplished as a striker and a marksman than anyone else at Leicester. Not sure why everyone is getting hung up on form, Paddy Kisnorobo was mince for 3 games and no one said a word
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 F'ckn shite come back and having someone else fight your battles is, well you now, a bit poofy like Dont really see it as a fight, more of a debate to be fair. But, hey, view it how you will.... You cant argue with 50% of people on here who say Hume is the better player. I've seen little back up for your claim that Fryatt is miles ahead of Hume, if anything people would rather lose Fryatt than Hume.... Your wrong pal. Face it.
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Dont really see it as a fight, more of a debate to be fair. But, hey, view it how you will....You cant argue with 50% of people on here who say Hume is the better player. I've seen little back up for your claim that Fryatt is miles ahead of Hume, if anything people would rather lose Fryatt than Hume.... Your wrong pal. Face it. Don't tell me I can't argue with 50% of people on here, I argued with 95% of people about Rob Kelly being crap and I was right then too As I have stated time and again, and thank you for giving me further evidence, Leicester City have one of the least knowledgable fan bases around. But if you say I am wrong then :laugh:
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 Don't tell me I can't argue with 50% of people on here, I argued with 95% of people about Rob Kelly being crap and I was right then too As I have stated time and again, and thank you for giving me further evidence, Leicester City have one of the least knowledgable fan bases around. But if you say I am wrong then :laugh: You can sit in your little corner pretending your always right, fighting pointless 'arguments', but I'll let this seasons stats do my talking for now....
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 You can sit in your little corner pretending your always right, fighting pointless 'arguments', but I'll let this seasons stats do my talking for now.... Good on you and you produce those stats because they mean f'ck all. Hammond has scored more goals than Fryatt does that make him a better striker
Fez of Mahrez Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 This is a bit like being on Bullseye, only I'm answering the questions while Stevie Wonder throws the darts. (You're Jim Bowen by the way Barton, not Stevie Wonder...)
BartonFox Posted 24 April 2007 Posted 24 April 2007 This is a bit like being on Bullseye, only I'm answering the questions while Stevie Wonder throws the darts.(You're Jim Bowen by the way Barton, not Stevie Wonder...) I notice you are another advocating Hume for a midfield role, but I have seen nothing to suggest he would fit the bill. Danny Tiatto ran around a lot too, but there was very little end product and Hume has the same ill discipline for such a role. With better players in the squad, Hume would find a regular game hard to come by in my honest opinion, but it's very hard to find a real goalscorer and we have one in Fryatt, we all saw that last season.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.