Thracian Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 :laugh: Yeah. :laugh:10 goals in 38 starts sounds almost vaguely half-decent, but 6 goals in 38 starts doesn't, which is what the fact actually is. Then another 4 goals in 25-odd sub appearances. For someone who is so obsessed with teams scoring goals, you don't half defend one of the worst strikers I've ever known as far as goalscoring is concerned. This is nothing to do with Fryatt. Nothing to do with de Vries or even Hume. You said his goals-to-starts ratio is "good enough". Good enough for what? Good enough for you to compare him with Fryatt, yes. Good enough for Martin Allen, Milan Mandaric and every other Leicester fan? No. Because that's how we should be measuring him now, not living in last season. And so it does compare well enough alongside his team-mates of last season. I have never for a moment suggested anything beyond that and, even now, his performance is only being considered alongside what we've got not the theoretical thousands of strikers we're supposedly going to get. Indeed, I've said many times that I don't even consider Elvis a centre-forward and have been as emphatic as anyone about saying how much I'd like Fowler here, and Earnshaw before that. But they are not here yet. And right now Hammond is just as good as all our SENIOR options bar Hume. As for what's "good enough for me" I first said we needed 80 goals a season to be successful way back in July last year. I also won my bet that we wouldn't get them and Fryatt would have a shit season. I pleaded for us to use attacking full-backs, players who could all pass-and-move, high-up-the-field through-the-team support. I said we needed more pace in defence, defenders who could pass and that we should play some of our outstanding Academy players. Martin Allen seems to be doing exactly that but don't try to suggest the new manager has come in advocating something new or of a higher standard than was highlighted as being needed long ago. I'm just glad MA seems to share those points of view - plus extras - and has the drive to make sure our players are properly fit as was also suggested by many. It's funny how much support there suddenly is for those things now after so much opposition from so many. I thought it would never happen but, at last, I believe we've got a manager who knows what the hell he's doing, who believes in aggressive, in-your-face positive football and who won't willingly take a step back against anyone. Furthermore he's got the courage and charisma to get his message across and to inspire others to take their own abilities past boundaries even they didn't believe they could cross. "Good enough for me?" you sneer. The only thing good enough for me is winning and playing proper football in doing so. And those who know me will confirm I've never thought any other way. But I also think Hammond deserves some respect for his efforts. When we have better alternatives you won't here me complain. But, new signings apart, those alternatives are likely to be people such as McKay and Chambers than anything I've seen on our pitch so far.
Geo V Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 But I also think Hammond deserves some respect for his efforts.When we have better alternatives you won't here me complain. But, new signings apart, those alternatives are likely to be people such as McKay and Chambers than anything I've seen on our pitch so far. You must be taking the piss? Im sure that we can pluck some lads from non-league football to do better than this clown. Why you seem to keep defending him and his goal-scoring record beggars belief!! He would have been shite in RK`s team, Pleats, Adams or whoevers. He is useless and should never be a striker at a club like Leicester.
Daggers Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 <collection of well-considered ideas and logical arguments> Elvis Hammond is a very misunderstood young man. Yes.
Chrysalis Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 I don't know how serious you were when you wrote that but thats absolute rubbish. Football is as much about stopping the other team from scoring as it is about attacking. Most managers would prefer to win 1-0 or 2-0 than 3-2 or 5-3 even if the fans wouldn't.Manchester United, Chelsea, Juventus, AC Milan, Arsenal...most great teams are built from the back. Real Madrid signed lots of attacking players and won nothing until they signed a couple of good defenders like Cannavaro. Even the Brazilians have spent many of the last few years playing with two defensive minded midfielders. Man u defence is pretty shocking actually, they win a lot of games by their attacking ability, real madrid is another team that is the same. I agree managers prefer to win 1-0 2-0, but generally if you have the ability to get a 2+ goal lead early in a game you will mostly win your games. Offense is a form of defense, if you are busy pegging the other team back then you also keeping them from your end of the pitch and scoring, sure defense cant be overlooked but grabbing a goal then looking to hold on to a 1-0 win is a much less successful tactic then attacking football.
mancunianfox Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 Man u defence is pretty shocking actually, they win a lot of games by their attacking ability, real madrid is another team that is the same.I agree managers prefer to win 1-0 2-0, but generally if you have the ability to get a 2+ goal lead early in a game you will mostly win your games. Yes...but my point was that both Real Madrid and Manchester United won the titles last year because they improved their defense considerably. You can have a team of good attacking players but if the defense is rubbish your not going to win anything...see Newcastle Utd.
Chrysalis Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 Yes...but my point was that both Real Madrid and Manchester United won the titles last year because they improved their defense considerably. You can have a team of good attacking players but if the defense is rubbish your not going to win anything...see Newcastle Utd. Reals defense last year performed very badly, they had a defensive manager who came in and changed the style of play, they proceeded to lose and draw some silly games after trying to hold on to 1 goal leads and failing, then towards the end of the season he backed down and swapped defensive midfielders with offensive and suddenly they went on that match winning run, they still conceded a fair few goals in that run but scored a lot as well. On paper defense was improved but if you watching the games you will have seen it was poor. Sun. 22 Real Madrid 2 - 1 Valencia La Liga Sun. 29 Athletic Bilbao 1 - 4 Real Madrid La Liga May. '07 HOME SCORE AWAY COMPETITION Sun. 6 Real Madrid 3 - 2 FC Sevilla La Liga Sun. 13 Real Madrid 4 - 3 Espanyol La Liga Sun. 20 Recreativo Huelva 2 - 3 Real Madrid La Liga Sun. 27 Real Madrid 3 - 1 Deportivo La Coruña La Liga Jun. '07 HOME SCORE AWAY COMPETITION Sun. 10 Real Zaragoza 2 - 2 Real Madrid La Liga Sun. 17 Real Madrid 3 - 1 Mallorca La Lig source http://www.realmadridportal.com/fixtures_results.php
Chrysalis Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 And Leicester. On paper we have worked on our defense the most under both kelly and levein I am surprised you was the only one to pick up on this, it didnt stop us almost getting relegated.
Thracian Posted 19 July 2007 Posted 19 July 2007 On paper we have worked on our defense the most under both kelly and levein I am surprised you was the only one to pick up on this, it didnt stop us almost getting relegated. Unfortunately for Kelly and Levein they never seemed to understand that defence and attack must be inter-connected. You cannot overload one at the expense of the other nor separate the two responsibilities.
Flynny Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 If we get offered 1.5 million for Fryatt he has to go. If he goes away and gets 15-20 goals... oh well, we got good money for him. If he goes away and scores about 5 all season, we'll have done good business. With the people we're signing at the moment, Fryatt might find it difficult to get a game this season. We won't get offered 1.5 million for him again, or anything like that amount.
Simi Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 If we get offered 1.5 million for Fryatt he has to go. If he goes away and gets 15-20 goals... oh well, we got good money for him. If he goes away and scores about 5 all season, we'll have done good business.With the people we're signing at the moment, Fryatt might find it difficult to get a game this season. We won't get offered 1.5 million for him again, or anything like that amount. Maybe this could shed a little light as to why we have supposedly paid 2 mil for Campbell. If Fryatt goes, that's £500,000 for Campbell.
davieG Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 If we get offered 1.5 million for Fryatt he has to go. If he goes away and gets 15-20 goals... oh well, we got good money for him. If he goes away and scores about 5 all season, we'll have done good business.With the people we're signing at the moment, Fryatt might find it difficult to get a game this season. We won't get offered 1.5 million for him again, or anything like that amount. Unless he's stay's and scores 15-20 goals for us then it might be £2.1 mill
Master Fox Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Maybe this could shed a little light as to why we have supposedly paid 2 mil for Campbell. If Fryatt goes, that's £500,000 for Campbell. Yeah? So what. Fryatt is sh*t, Campbell is a much better player. I don't care if we pay £10m! Who gives a sh*t? That's whole point of Milan being here because he's got the dollar to do this. Do you really want to be stuck with pissing Fryatt, Elvis, Cort, and De Vries? No, so shut up moaning about the ****ing cost, it's irrelevant.
Flynny Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Unless he's stay's and scores 15-20 goals for us then it might be £2.1 mill Unlikely. I hope it happens, but unlikely.
Simi Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Yeah? So what. Fryatt is sh*t, Campbell is a much better player. I don't care if we pay £10m! Who gives a sh*t? That's whole point of Milan being here because he's got the dollar to do this. Do you really want to be stuck with pissing Fryatt, Elvis, Cort, and De Vries? No, so shut up moaning about the ****ing cost, it's irrelevant. I wasn't moaning ? I agree that Campbell is a better player, the point I was trying to make is that this is a good bit of business.
Master Fox Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 I wasn't moaning ? I agree that Campbell is a better player, the point I was trying to make is that this is a good bit of business. Sorry Ched, wasn't really directed at you but to others comments in general.
Cheese Me Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Yeah? So what. Fryatt is sh*t, Campbell is a much better player. I don't care if we pay £10m! Who gives a sh*t? That's whole point of Milan being here because he's got the dollar to do this. Do you really want to be stuck with pissing Fryatt, Elvis, Cort, and De Vries? No, so shut up moaning about the ****ing cost, it's irrelevant. Bo!!ocks. DJ was playing none league for a reason. But for two goals in a high profile FA cup game he'd probably still be a Brentford. Fryatt has quality, one unfit and injury ravaged season does not take that away. I would much, much, much, much rather have Fryatt than DJ (and Fowler than both). Milan will only invest a finitie amount of money into the club, it's still important that he spends it in the right way. £2m for DJ is £2m that isn't being spent somewhere else (fees, wages, backroom, training, etc).
davieG Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Bo!!ocks.DJ was playing none league for a reason. But for two goals in a high profile FA cup game he'd probably still be a Brentford. Fryatt has quality, one unfit and injury ravaged season does not take that away. I would much, much, much, much rather have Fryatt than DJ (and Fowler than both). Milan will only invest a finitie amount of money into the club, it's still important that he spends it in the right way. £2m for DJ is £2m that isn't being spent somewhere else (fees, wages, backroom, training, etc). Except it's £1.6m
dandannieldanok Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Yeah? So what. Fryatt is sh*t, Campbell is a much better player. I don't care if we pay £10m! Who gives a sh*t? That's whole point of Milan being here because he's got the dollar to do this. Do you really want to be stuck with pissing Fryatt, Elvis, Cort, and De Vries? No, so shut up moaning about the ****ing cost, it's irrelevant. Couldn't agree more, DJ is an exciting player, apart from Hume and DJ our strikeforce is limp.
Mickey O'Neil Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 I'd love Fryatt to stay as I've got a feeling he's going to have a good season. However, I think his heart isn't here and, imho, I reckon RK knows that he's unhappy, hence the link to PNE. Maybe. Or not!
Simi Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Bo!!ocks.DJ was playing none league for a reason. But for two goals in a high profile FA cup game he'd probably still be a Brentford. Fryatt has quality, one unfit and injury ravaged season does not take that away. I would much, much, much, much rather have Fryatt than DJ (and Fowler than both). Milan will only invest a finitie amount of money into the club, it's still important that he spends it in the right way. £2m for DJ is £2m that isn't being spent somewhere else (fees, wages, backroom, training, etc). DJ Campbell 83 goals in 109 appearances at Yeading 12 goals in 22 for Brentford 12 goals in 24 for Birmingham It's clear to see that Campbell can but it in the Championship, maybe the FA Cup goals gave him the publicity he needed to make the step up, but he certainly has not been out of his depth at this level. Matty Fryatt 1 in 9 for Carlisle 27 goals in 49 for Walsall 9 in 39 for Leicester
Master Fox Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Bo!!ocks.DJ was playing none league for a reason. But for two goals in a high profile FA cup game he'd probably still be a Brentford. Fryatt has quality, one unfit and injury ravaged season does not take that away. I would much, much, much, much rather have Fryatt than DJ (and Fowler than both). Milan will only invest a finitie amount of money into the club, it's still important that he spends it in the right way. £2m for DJ is £2m that isn't being spent somewhere else (fees, wages, backroom, training, etc). B*LLOX!!!!! Fryatt has NO quality. Fryatt is crap, that's it. He's a nothing player and Bournemouth bound. Milan will invest whatever it takes to get us back to the Prem. Never once has he said 'Right I'm going to spend £££ amount on this, and £££ on that' You just don't know so why say it? Nobody does, it's just rumoured bullshit. Every player starts somewhere, and I'm pretty sure quite a lot the top players came from lower leagues, it's called progression.
dandannieldanok Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 To be honest if it was a straight choice between Fryatt and Fowler, which it could very well be, I'd keep Matty.
Master Fox Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Couldn't agree more, DJ is an exciting player, apart from Hume and DJ our strikeforce is limp. Damn right, at least someone can see that.
Joe. Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 To be honest if it was a straight choice between Fryatt and Fowler, which it could very well be, I'd keep Matty. :laugh: Matty Fryatt over Robbie Fowler? I'm sorry but I can't really comprehend that. Fowler is a player who oozes quality unlike Fryatt. Despite his advancing years, Fowler could certainly teach our current crop of strikers a thing or two.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.