Flynny Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 My third problem concerns Fryatt. We can't go on with a player who puts in one promising third of a game and then all but disappears. Fryatt gives us another dimension with the ball at his feet and holds the ball up well without losing it. If he could actually tee up John/Hume from time to time instead of shooting from less promising positions than his strike partner, he'd be exactly what we need. Having said that, John's positioning and run making isn't always the most intelligent. If he was scoring a little more regularly he wouldn't need to show up for more than a third of the game anyway, thats what you get with strikers. My concern is basically that we often look flat when he isn't playing. Ollie seems to have had a positive effect on passing and movement so far, so hopefully he'll be droppable soon and we can play Hume behind someone else, with Fryatt on the bench for impact. I wouldn't just yet, though.
STUHILL Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 Now if we are typical leicester, i.e the same Leicester city that although has had so many changes, still hasnt changed much at all! Then I am expecting a total lack of passion and poor performance! For the last four years we have seen this pattern of performing quite well one week then days later showing no passion or energy. I hope Olli is different and we start seeing some consistency and fighting spirit! If we see that, we will win!
renards Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 I always do stupid things like this in team selections! like i put two of the same player in the team, i give up... could be worse.....could of named cort and newton as subs
Ultra Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 Fryatt gives us another dimension with the ball at his feet and holds the ball up well without losing it. If he could actually tee up John/Hume from time to time instead of shooting from less promising positions than his strike partner, he'd be exactly what we need. Having said that, John's positioning and run making isn't always the most intelligent. They were still infinitely better than Fryatt's on Saturday. I don't think we should be going into ANY home game with SIX defensive outfield players (seven including Clemence who is basically a holding player). Therefore another attacking player (Hayes) should come into the side instead of N'Gotty or Chambers. Other than that, I'd keep the same side. There's no point in change for change's sake.
Koke Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 This has a draw written all over it. Ipswich are abysmal away from home, and we are just abysmal, full stop. I can see a 0-0 on the cards.
Flynny Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 They were still infinitely better than Fryatt's on Saturday.I don't think we should be going into ANY home game with SIX defensive outfield players (seven including Clemence who is basically a holding player). Therefore another attacking player (Hayes) should come into the side instead of N'Gotty or Chambers. Other than that, I'd keep the same side. There's no point in change for change's sake. Chambers was an effective attacker the other day and there's no point labelling him a purely defensive player just because thats his best position. I was impressed. Personally I'd drop Clemence. He made some good last-ditch tackles the other night but other than that he was absolutely pointless.
WetFlannel Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 Were due a penalty 1-0 Hume We'll probably miss it anyway... but i sense a win here
Thracian Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 Chambers was an effective attacker the other day and there's no point labelling him a purely defensive player just because thats his best position. I was impressed. Personally I'd drop Clemence. He made some good last-ditch tackles the other night but other than that he was absolutely pointless. Quite agree. The thing about Chambers is his pace and staying power. He's onto the people with the ball much faster than Clemence. Attacking-wise I cannot much difference. Clemence used to get a few decent shots in but he rarely gets near the penalty box anymore so altogether i see more to be gained from having Chambers. As a bonus that covering pace might give King (if used) more opportunity to get forward than he'd otherwise have and that would give us more threat than if Clemence were in there.
Ultra Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 There are some players that Holloway will never bring himself to drop. Fryatt is one of them. Clemence is another. I cannot EVER recall Chambers having a shot at goal, or even entering the attacking third of the pitch. Indeed, his role is to act as a screen in front of the back four. As for King, he isn't ready for first-team football yet. His time may come later in the season but pitching him in now would do him more harm than good.
Simi Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 I cannot EVER recall Chambers having a shot at goal, or even entering the attacking third of the pitch. Indeed, his role is to act as a screen in front of the back four. But that is what Clemence has done for the whole of his career. Having Chambers cover his ground is doing him no good at all and in my opinion certainly hampering his performances. We need to actually establish a midfield that can work together as a unit, not a makeshift four players for a each game. It will never work like that, ever.
Manwell Pablo Posted 24 December 2007 Posted 24 December 2007 If we don't at least get a point from this I'd be very, very worried, I can't remember a team being as bad as Ipswitch on the road oustide the Premier League.
Matt Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 'times kick off? Normal 3pm as far as I know (And according to the OS, as people have said thought you can never put 100% faith in the OS)
WetFlannel Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 Hume will slay their defence in his current form...
DB11 Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 Has Fulop gone back to Sunderland yet?? Or was that not true?
Brainy Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 Really excited about this one. Probably the whole Christmas thing
Bryn Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 Has Fulop gone back to Sunderland yet?? Or was that not true? Two games left including tomorrow, goes back January 1st. Well, his contract expires 00:01 January 1st.
DB11 Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 Two games left including tomorrow, goes back January 1st. Well, his contract expires 00:01 January 1st. I believe you, but is there anywhere it is confirmed? I hope Leicester sign him on the 1st Jan. Please Milan!
He's not bald Posted 25 December 2007 Posted 25 December 2007 I believe you, but is there anywhere it is confirmed?I hope Leicester sign him on the 1st Jan. Please Milan! Won't happen,that would mean MM parting with some serious dosh and he aint done that yet!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.