Dames Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 The Fryatt arguement is getting boring now. In a nutshell. Hes partially gifted but he can't be arsed to play for Leicester and the only reason he's looking decent in Pre-season is to get himself in the shop window.
Jay 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). Yeah I mean what a load of rubbish that Ian Wright was he was obviously shifting bricks and playing non league football for a reason!! oh and Les Ferdinand!! oh and Stuart Pearce!! or more recently Michael Kightly and Freddy Eastwood!! some excellent players have played non league before becoming pros Campbell has pace, power a bit of skill and an eye for goal!!! Fryatt has no pace, dubious fitness and what seems like no desire to player for Leicester imo
Brainy Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Have I missed something? Why does Fryatt "not care about Leicester" anymore?
Simi Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 Have I missed something? Why does Fryatt "not care about Leicester" anymore? The only thing that I can relate to that is, apparently, Brum came in for Fryatt in January and I heard he took the arse because we rejected the bid.
SystonFox Posted 20 July 2007 Posted 20 July 2007 i think Fryatt wants to play for us. he has a good eye for goal as shown against Sunderland, Derby and Fulham last season and plenty of times the one before. the competition wont hurt him i think he could be a good player for us. plus DU DU DU DU DJ CAMPBELL isnt as good.
Thracian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Yeah I mean what a load of rubbish that Ian Wright was he was obviously shifting bricks and playing non league football for a reason!!oh and Les Ferdinand!! oh and Stuart Pearce!! or more recently Michael Kightly and Freddy Eastwood!! some excellent players have played non league before becoming pros Campbell has pace, power a bit of skill and an eye for goal!!! Fryatt has no pace, dubious fitness and what seems like no desire to player for Leicester imo Plus: Limited heading ability, limited shooting range, doesn't seem particularly powerful and is more an individual than a team player.
lildave3 Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Keep him. Let's see how well he does and if he's shit, send him packing in January.
teblin Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 I'll have them both at the club. But think fryatt might leave.Fryatt does have abilty but a) wasn't fit last yearb) had a crap manager to motivate him. A great post there.Your insults make your original point less credible i think.Stop causing trouble
Thracian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Keep him. Let's see how well he does and if he's shit, send him packing in January. There's nothing wrong with that strategy anyway. And certainly no reason why we should sell the guy to our rivals. Even as an occasional substitute he might make a contribution on our behalf instead of perhaps scoring for others and adversely affecting our own situation. And if he suddenly hits a run of form, or somehow develops the striking qualities he seems to lack, then fine, it would be a bonus.
casabian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Martin Allen said on skysports last night thet he needs alot of strikers next season to challenge for the championship this season he said he looked at how many teams had who went up last season . so to me if we get fowler we will have 5 strikers that he wants at the club and 2 that are transfer listed for me matty is going nowhere
filbertway Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 It's fashionable to call his shooting but his goals per starts ratio is good enough.He's already got one in two during pre-season and had a cracking right foot volley at Hinckley that would have been a goal but for a brilliant save. Hammond's biggest handicap is that he looks clumsy. But when Hammond has a close range shot well saved it's a glaring miss. When Fryatt does the same it is virtually overlooked. I'm not thinking of last night but examples at the Kop End last season. I love Elvis as much as the next man, but he had a free volley from 8-10 yards, should have gone in really.
Dr The Singh Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 I love Elvis as much as the next man, but he had a free volley from 8-10 yards, should have gone in really. Both Hammond and Fryatt are lagging in form and look poo. Although Fryatt did show some endeaver when Kelly took charge and went on a goal scoring spree, but since then he looks impotent (in the goal scoring and team playing sense), but one may say due to injuries and city's style of play!! Hammond on the other hand has never been great, he is league 2 at best!! Unfortunately, for both, we are now a team that wants quick success, failure for both is now not an option, I feel both will be made surplus to our requirements!!!
Thracian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 I love Elvis as much as the next man, but he had a free volley from 8-10 yards, should have gone in really. It looked a bit further out than than but, whatever, he hit it perfectly and the goalkeeper reacted fast enough to save it. You don't get chance to place shots like that when the ball's coming from the side and in the air. It's hard enough getting the technique right and keeping the ball down. He's the only player in the club who would be criticised for that effort. In fact, even had it gone in and had that terrific move he took part in with Porter produced an exceptional goal instead of Beswick's header into the side netting, it still wouldn't have silenced the grumblers. As for loving Elvis as much as the next man - you are the next man. There aren't any more. Except Martin Allen maybe.
filbertway Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 It looked a bit further out than than but, whatever, he hit it perfectly and the goalkeeper reacted fast enough to save it.You don't get chance to place shots like that when the ball's coming from the side and in the air. It's hard enough getting the technique right and keeping the ball down. He's the only player in the club who would be criticised for that effort. In fact, even had it gone in and had that terrific move he took part in with Porter produced an exceptional goal instead of Beswick's header into the side netting, it still wouldn't have silenced the grumblers. As for loving Elvis as much as the next man - you are the next man. There aren't any more. Except Martin Allen maybe. Thats what he's paid to do though, Fryatt would have buried that chance. (Just to wind you up ) Joe loves him as well, so thats 3 of us
Thracian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Thats what he's paid to do though, Fryatt would have buried that chance. (Just to wind you up )Joe loves him as well, so thats 3 of us I didn't see any signs of that at Oadby where he missed far easier opportunities.
filbertway Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 I didn't see any signs of that at Oadby where he missed far easier opportunities. I wasn't there so it doesn't count
bringbackWalshie Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 fryatt has bags of quality, so much so he could probably give elvis a spare and make him a good player. Granted he was poor last year for a varitey of reasons but he still showed in glimpses his class. He isn't a striker that will chase lost causes and be a pest like hume, but he is a poacher, he's very composed in front of goal similar to Rush, Linekar, Owen. A Good side needs a quality finisher, he is ours!
Thracian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 fryatt has bags of quality, so much so he could probably give elvis a spare and make him a good player. Granted he was poor last year for a varitey of reasons but he still showed in glimpses his class. He isn't a striker that will chase lost causes and be a pest like hume, but he is a poacher, he's very composed in front of goal similar to Rush, Linekar, Owen. A Good side needs a quality finisher, he is ours! You've probably touched there on why I doubt he'll satisfy Martin Allen. He might well be described as nothing but a poacher but, sadly, he's nothing like as fast as the players you've compared him too.
bringbackWalshie Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Owen was fast! past tense. Linekar and Rush where not quick players. They had an extra yard in their head thats what made them deadly finishers
filbertway Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 You've probably touched there on why I doubt he'll satisfy Martin Allen.He might well be described as nothing but a poacher but, sadly, he's nothing like as fast as the players you've compared him too. :w00t: :w00t: Mature.
Thracian Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 Owen was fast! past tense. Linekar and Rush where not qucik players. They had an extra yard in their head thats what made them deadly finishers They had an extra yard on the ground as well compared with Fryatt. But someone should send this thread to Fryatt. It might be just website chat but it's the closest his name with ever get to those three.
bringbackWalshie Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 He is quicker than most, it amases me how quickly people forget and slag off players. He has shown his potential in flashes in between injury's. If when fit and after a good run of games he doesn't perform i'll quiet happily get rid of him
Solihullfox Posted 21 July 2007 Posted 21 July 2007 He is quicker than most, it amases me how quickly people forget and slag off players. He has shown his potential in flashes in between injury's. If when fit and after a good run of games he doesn't perform i'll quiet happily get rid of him Quicker than most.........what ? over 65's ? Let's be honest Matty is hardly quick is he !
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.