Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
mikelcfc

steve howard the same as de vries?

Recommended Posts

Posted

just got back from the shambles at cov and it appears that howard is just as bad as de vries was under levein. ollie has said that the players need to stop relying on him for the long ball , it seems ollie is relying on him for some reason. if the guy your hoofing long balls to gets taken off , then there is no more long ball(logically) . why he didnt take him off today il never know. it also bemuses me that when watford went down to ten men, howard stayed on, it made it easy for watford to defend cause all it was was the long ball! ollie should have took him off and put both wingers on with hume and campbell upfront giving the side pace and width to tire watford out. its astonishing how we all can seem to see whats going wrong but nothing seems to change on the pitch.

Posted
just got back from the shambles at cov and it appears that howard is just as bad as de vries was under levein. ollie has said that the players need to stop relying on him for the long ball , it seems ollie is relying on him for some reason. if the guy your hoofing long balls to gets taken off , then there is no more long ball(logically) . why he didnt take him off today il never know. it also bemuses me that when watford went down to ten men, howard stayed on, it made it easy for watford to defend cause all it was was the long ball! ollie should have took him off and put both wingers on with hume and campbell upfront giving the side pace and width to tire watford out. its astonishing how we all can seem to see whats going wrong but nothing seems to change on the pitch.

Howard scores goals regularly and he's scored 3 already here. People rely on him too much but when you have a bunch of headless chickens who don't know how to play football and manage then that's what you can expect - longball.

Posted

How can he be expected to shine when all he gets are balls lumped up to him and only one player within 20 yards as support. Far more reasonable to ask Ian Holloway why he thinks this will work.

Posted

A little too many I reckon. Give Super Steve some time, he'll get there eventually. If he can bang in 20+ goals for Derby in their promotion campaign, he can sure as hell bang in 20+ goals for us in one season.

Posted
A little too many I reckon. Give Super Steve some time, he'll get there eventually. If he can bang in 20+ goals for Derby in their promotion campaign, he can sure as hell bang in 20+ goals for us in one season.

Steve Howard hasn't scored 20 goals a season in his career, never mind 20 "+"

Posted

I remember when Hume played up there with Fryatt or someone for a while and we still HOOFED long balls to Hume! It's not a case of taken Howard off and suddenly we will change. Hitting long hopefull balls is showing a lack of confidence more than anything. I think we would do it no matter who is up there. I actually feel sorry for Howard, we just arent playing to his strengths. He is a great finisher if he is given the right service, i.e not long, high balls from defence, instead, crosses coming from the wingers.

Posted
Nevertheless Manwell, he clearly can score the goals. Just like Holloway, just give the guy some bloody time! Geez, Leicester City fans are letting the situation get to their heads.

:dunno:

He's scored 19 goals last year, 15 the year before at Luton. Which aint bad I suppose but age really isn't on his side and I still don't know why we paid 1.5 mil for him, until we get a team around him thats going to be top half he isn't going to score that many. He needs crosses and chances in the box, he's never going to skin someone and hasn't exactly got an incredible shot on him has he.

I agree he's much better than big Mark and also agree he should be playing, but I will say we didn't blow half of our transfer fund on De Vries did we? We paid about 50k for him.

Posted
:dunno:

He's scored 19 goals last year, 15 the year before at Luton. Which aint bad I suppose but age really isn't on his side and I still don't know why we paid 1.5 mil for him, until we get a team around him thats going to be top half he isn't going to score that many. He needs crosses and chances in the box, he's never going to skin someone and hasn't exactly got an incredible shot on him has he.

I agree he's much better than big Mark and also agree he should be playing, but I will say we didn't blow half of our transfer fund on De Vries did we? We paid about 50k for him.

But he's scored goals hasn't he? True, the age factor is starting to get to him, but Ollie didn't get him for no reason did he?

We shouldn't have even got big Mark, the biggest waste of Dutch space I've seen on Leicester soil. Not even worth 1k, never mind 50k.

Posted
But he's scored goals hasn't he? True, the age factor is starting to get to him, but Ollie didn't get him for no reason did he?

We shouldn't have even got big Mark, the biggest waste of Dutch space I've seen on Leicester soil. Not even worth 1k, never mind 50k.

Bambi was fantastic for the comedy factor

Posted

de Vries wasn't that bad a player, and was certainly more mobile than Steve Howard (not that that's hard, or anything :D ). But then, I was bound to say that.

I still think Howard can be a good player for us, he just needs people to give him the ball into his feet a lot of the time as opposed to smashing it to him in the air, expecting him to win it, bring it down and hold it up until support arrives five minutes later. I said after the Norwich game that we'd come good as a team if we didn't revert back to the long ball, and I'm guessing (obviously didn't attend yesterday) that this was not the case and we played more of the same old hoof stuff instead?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...