Babylon Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Reading through this thread there are a couple of things I don't understand.Thrac is slating Ollie for going with experience. Alnwick - 21 Mattock - 17 Stearman - 20 McAuley - 28 Kisnorbo - 26 Lazcko - 21 Hume - 24 Clemence - 29 Oakley - 30 Howard - 31 Hayles - 35 Thats an average age of 25,6, and thats with Hayles innit...... And you want more of our kids in the side???? About Hume on the right. I do believe, that Ollie is looking for a right winger and had this position addressed in the window, but it just didn't happend. Don't know if Ollie was hoping for Norris. Right now he clearly feels that Hume is the best choice out there, as he properly tracks back better and communicate with Stearman better than Bori. I think Ollie wants Hume up front alongside Howard, and then have DJ and Hayles to come from the bench, but basically is about options upfront and what kind of striker you need for a certain match. About Gradel. Maybe it is not the right time to be introduced to first team football at this club. The fans are nervy, and will get on his back quick if he fails to impress. Ollie wouldn't make him first choice anyway, so he might be better off at the South Coast and helping Forest NOT to get automatic promotion. About Fryatt vs Hayles As long as they score goals in a Leicester shirt I love them both, but honestly Fryatt doesn't have Hayles' luck does he...? About dire performances with Ollie in charge. This is a dire division, this club is a dire mess, we signed 14 players in the summer - 2 plays and most of the rest are paid to leave us again, Rome wasn't built in one frickin day, we spent 4 seasons to get in this mess and not even Saruman with a wand could fix this dire mess in 10 weeks. We dont have 3 rightbacks in midfield anymore at least, cheer up..... JF... you're my new favourite poster. Sorry Ric and Fez you're demoted.
Manwell Pablo Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 JF... you're my new favourite poster. Sorry Ric and Fez you're demoted. Oh right, like that is it.
Babylon Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Oh right, like that is it. Nah you're still a number two baby.
Manwell Pablo Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Does anyone find it extremly bizare that Thracian has completley vanished since the Shush! thread was closed. I would like to repeat on his behalf that he shows no bias to youth team products.
Daggers Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 I'm listening to him currently - and I'm deeply impressed with his candor. The naming and shaming that's going on has been long overdue in coming...none of that "great bunch of lads" bollocks.
Babylon Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 I'm listening to him currently - and I'm deeply impressed with his candor.The naming and shaming that's going on has been long overdue in coming...none of that "great bunch of lads" bollocks. Pretty much my take on it, we've tried it that way and it has got us nowhere. Does anyone find it extremly bizare that Thracian has completley vanished since the Shush! thread was closed.I would like to repeat on his behalf that he shows no bias to youth team products. Is he locked inside that thread? Trapped in the shush thread finding a new definition of pain and suffering as he is slowly digested over a thousand years.
sdb Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 just listening now, v impressed with the ogmeister. he seems to really know what he's on about and what needs to be done.
Thracian Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Does anyone find it extremly bizare that Thracian has completley vanished since the Shush! thread was closed.I would like to repeat on his behalf that he shows no bias to youth team products. That's cos the reserves match started at 2.00pm.
Geo V Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 The young players are as good as I think they are. They just might not be as good as you say I think they are, which is quite different.A univesal problem in our society is that employees want people with experience but young people can't get experience without doing the job. Someone has to give them their chance, show some faith in them. And so far the young players you mention have generally done perfectly well, at least those who have actually had a proper chance. In a squad situation as football is today they were never likely to make a position "their own" because a manager has other people to keep happy like senior players on considerably higher wager for a start. As for injury and variations in form I don't see they young players have been any more prone to those things than the seniors. Clemence, Cort, DJ, Kenton, Fryatt have all had injury problems. Form wise I'm not sure any of our seniors apart from Fulop has been outstanding either. The centre-backs have been consistent, yes. They've battled heroically and won the ball in dangerous situations to some effect but they've consistently given it away straight afterwards as well. Newton was a disaster, as was Cort and, despite being top scorer, I wouldn't say Hume has been outstanding, nor Clemence. It's just politically easier for managers to go with experience but we're going to need some pace, some devil and some invention if we're going to score goals and that won't come from labouring legs. And to my mind our options have been considerably restricted by recent decisions. I say option becuase I've NEVER believed the young players should be used whatever. I've believed they should be blended in slowly but consistently and within the framework of a blend of pass-and-move footballers that has experienced players of real ability and character. We don't have that. If City's players were seen as car components we have perfectly reasonable bits but from all sorts of vehicles rather than parts that can be easily fitted together to produce a nice, smooth-running car. You actually contradicted yourself there mate. In one breath you say that they should be given the chance and kept in and then in another you are suggesting that they should be blended in slowly! The fact is that if these young lads mentioned on this thread were that good, they would be in the side and we wouldn't have to get replacements. No real City fan would slate there own if they were playing well but many of us are frustrated that many are just not up to the required standard at this level.
Collymore Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Mr Holloway - If you read these boards, why don't you challenge foxestalk members to a Q&A or phone session instead of those idiots I heard on the re-run of that supid phone in I've just listerned to? What a joke!!!! It's as if you've just got actors in from the 'Barbers school of commentary' to give you a hand!!!!
Thracian Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 You actually contradicted yourself there mate. In one breath you say that they should be given the chance and kept in and then in another you are suggesting that they should be blended in slowly!The fact is that if these young lads mentioned on this thread were that good, they would be in the side and we wouldn't have to get replacements. No real City fan would slate there own if they were playing well but many of us are frustrated that many are just not up to the required standard at this level. There's no contradiction at all. There is a squad of 16 for matches. And I've never suggested all the young contenders should play all the time, quite the contrary. I said Shush!/Mattock should be brought on in tandem, gradel should come off the bench at first, King should be used in 20/30 minute slots and so on. You keep repeating the "not that good" phrase as if you're trying to convince yourself. Well Mattock didn't sound "not that good" among premiership colleagues tonight, Porter didn't sound "not that good" against Chelsea, Shush! remains second in the official list of assists and King has scored the best two goals I've seen this season at Leicester, one for the reserves, admittedly, but I doubt any Premiership goalkeeper would have stopped it.
Bert Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 There's no contradiction at all. There is a squad of 16 for matches. And I've never suggested all the young contenders should play all the time, quite the contrary. I said Shush!/Mattock should be brought on in tandem, gradel should come off the bench at first, King should be used in 20/30 minute slots and so on. You keep repeating the "not that good" phrase as if you're trying to convince yourself. Well Mattock didn't sound "not that good" among premiership colleagues tonight, Porter didn't sound "not that good" against Chelsea, Shush! remains second in the official list of assists and King has scored the best two goals I've seen this season at Leicester, one for the reserves, admittedly, but I doubt any Premiership goalkeeper would have stopped it. But that's reserve team football. It simply doesn't matter, except to you.
Hullfox Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 There's no contradiction at all. There is a squad of 16 for matches. And I've never suggested all the young contenders should play all the time, quite the contrary. I said Shush!/Mattock should be brought on in tandem, gradel should come off the bench at first, King should be used in 20/30 minute slots and so on. You keep repeating the "not that good" phrase as if you're trying to convince yourself. Well Mattock didn't sound "not that good" among premiership colleagues tonight, Porter didn't sound "not that good" against Chelsea, Shush! remains second in the official list of assists and King has scored the best two goals I've seen this season at Leicester, one for the reserves, admittedly, but I doubt any Premiership goalkeeper would have stopped it. Neither did Cort, I've never witnessed you blowing smoke up his arse though.
Raj Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Mr Holloway - If you read these boards,why don't you challenge foxestalk members to a Q&A or phone session instead of those idiots I heard on the re-run of that supid phone in I've just listerned to? What a joke!!!! It's as if you've just got actors in from the 'Barbers school of commentary' to give you a hand!!!! Erm.....Is that REALLY such a good idea????
Collymore Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Erm.....Is that REALLY such a good idea???? Selected members maybe... Tharcian and I.......
Collymore Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Selected members maybe... Tharcian and I....... because I'm as controversial and fequent as thracian
Candidcamera Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 The attack needs pace and if Howard is to be given the service he needs (Hayles is substitute material) a winger is needed. Stearman is playing great at the moment so play Bori or Sinclair when he comes. Hume shoulf play behind the front two in a roving central position not on the wing. Hume has pace and can provide the pass for goal. Players must learn to pass and run.
reynard Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Anyone else think there may be trouble brewing with Hume? Clear he doesn't want to play there yet Ollie insists he has to play where he is told. can see him being sold in the summer if the relationship between them gets bad.
Ric Flair Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Anyone else think there may be trouble brewing with Hume?Clear he doesn't want to play there yet Ollie insists he has to play where he is told. can see him being sold in the summer if the relationship between them gets bad. Yes, I do. I think I wrote a thread about it a few months back, or that might have been when Smegson was here. He's not having a good season with us this year, but he's still the only player who scores goals for us on a fairly un-punctual basis. Without him, we'll struggle even more. He doesn't seem the sort of player who takes too kindly to a bollocking, he's the sort who needs an arm round the shoulder and his ego stroked. Some fans might be fooked off with that, but that's how it goes with some players. Holloway needs to decide what's best for Hume and stick to it, if it means moving him on then I hope he has something up his sleeve to replace him. He might as well be gotten rid of if we keep playing him on the wing.
Alexikokopops Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Reading through this thread there are a couple of things I don't understand.Thrac is slating Ollie for going with experience. Alnwick - 21 Mattock - 17 Stearman - 20 McAuley - 28 Kisnorbo - 26 Lazcko - 21 Hume - 24 Clemence - 29 Oakley - 30 Howard - 31 Hayles - 35 Thats an average age of 25,6, and thats with Hayles innit...... And you want more of our kids in the side???? About Hume on the right. I do believe, that Ollie is looking for a right winger and had this position addressed in the window, but it just didn't happend. Don't know if Ollie was hoping for Norris. Right now he clearly feels that Hume is the best choice out there, as he properly tracks back better and communicate with Stearman better than Bori. I think Ollie wants Hume up front alongside Howard, and then have DJ and Hayles to come from the bench, but basically is about options upfront and what kind of striker you need for a certain match. About Gradel. Maybe it is not the right time to be introduced to first team football at this club. The fans are nervy, and will get on his back quick if he fails to impress. Ollie wouldn't make him first choice anyway, so he might be better off at the South Coast and helping Forest NOT to get automatic promotion. About Fryatt vs Hayles As long as they score goals in a Leicester shirt I love them both, but honestly Fryatt doesn't have Hayles' luck does he...? About dire performances with Ollie in charge. This is a dire division, this club is a dire mess, we signed 14 players in the summer - 2 plays and most of the rest are paid to leave us again, Rome wasn't built in one frickin day, we spent 4 seasons to get in this mess and not even Saruman with a wand could fix this dire mess in 10 weeks. We dont have 3 rightbacks in midfield anymore at least, cheer up..... Lovely stuff.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.