lildave3 Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Who else are we expected to get? Roberto Carlos? He's perfectly happy at Fenerbahce thankyou very much.
MikeyT Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 i think considering the position in the table we are in and who he needs to cover for then it seems to me to be as good a signing as we could get. If we couldnt get Scott sinclair becayse we are ' not good enough' then i would be suprised if there were other players our ambition would of wanted us to get that our league position wouldnt alow us to get. Better defender than Mattock and experienced so Mattock can only learn from players like him and be better equipped for next season!
Flynny Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Dear me.Sometimes I wonder if people actually watch Leicester City play. What's Clapham possible done wrong since he's been here? He's been very steady for me, what we needed really. And he's much more reassured than Mattock who was just too inexperienced. Clapham offers us experience and generally solid play. He was responsible for letting a lot go by him in the first half against Cov, first time I've really thought "fucks sake left-back STILL needs looking at". People complaining before was definitely silly but I thought he was given too much credit on Saturday.
Anish Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 He's been solid and steady. Mattock has been exposed all too often this season and has been caught out badly on a number of goals. Clapham has hardly put a foot wrong defensively, and I hope Mattock will learn a thing or two from him. We've got far bigger problems than left back and at least Clapham's not been at fault for the goals we've conceded recently.
The Stig Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 He's been solid and steady. Mattock has been exposed all too often this season and has been caught out badly on a number of goals. Clapham has hardly put a foot wrong defensively, and I hope Mattock will learn a thing or two from him. We've got far bigger problems than left back and at least Clapham's not been at fault for the goals we've conceded recently. Well said. Saves me a lot of typing!
Super Arj Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 i agree with you mate i like to call him Jamie Crapham lol ... i know im so original
Fatbloke Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 JC has been a steady and solid signing, we needed a bit of experience and he fits the bill, There is no doubt that Joe and Alan Shush! are the future and we are lucky to have two such outstanding left sided players, but in a relegation scrap the pressure can be a bit much for youngsters and this is no doubt in the Managers thoughts, in my opinion, and in hindsight, it would have been better to keep Shush! here, he`s more of a "man" than Joe and has alway`s looked a good player, not a good for a kid, good full stop, Clapham was good business just till the end of the season, it`s up to him if he stay`s beyond that.
clazkel Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Clapham has been playing quite well but i still prefer Mattock as i know he sometimes makes a mistake but with Mattock in the team i feel the team is more positive as he tries to get forward whereas i have rarely seen Clapham getting forward. If you want to win a game you need to be positive!
Daz.I Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 to be deadly honest I think he's absolutely shite, he backs off far to much he stands there like shall I get him shall I not by the time he's decided they've swung a ball in the box most of our defensive errors have came from the left side since clapham has been here. get rid in my opinion
Scow Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Can't remember how he played against Plymouth because I was too drunk, but I've been pleased with him so far. A tidy player that uses the ball well and has done a solid job defensively. Looked a little sluggish against Coventry, although still a better option that Mattock at the moment. Mattock is prone to being caught out and lacks composure on the ball.
Fatbloke Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Why on earth would anyone attend a football match so totally worse for alcohol that they were unable to remember the game at all ? do yourself a favour young man and look after your liver you only have one and it needs to last you a lifetime.
MikeyT Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Why on earth would anyone attend a football match so totally worse for alcohol that they were unable to remember the game at all ? do yourself a favour young man and look after your liver you only have one and it needs to last you a lifetime.
termite111 Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 It was an uninspiring signing for such a supposedly ambitious team I thought. Regardless of how psollyd he's been. imo i don't see why this has even been brought up he is doing a solid job for us so far i think he is what we needed to be honest. mattock is going to be a quality player no doubt about it but at the mo cause of his age he's a bit naive in defense jumping in to tackles etc when needin to hold back, sometimes he is very easy to beat to get crosses in. he'll improve with age and help from clapham.
Scow Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 Why on earth would anyone attend a football match so totally worse for alcohol that they were unable to remember the game at all ? do yourself a favour young man and look after your liver you only have one and it needs to last you a lifetime. I'll take that on board, grandpa.
danny. Posted 28 February 2008 Posted 28 February 2008 He has the same initials as Jesus Christ. Enough said.
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 29 February 2008 Posted 29 February 2008 Odd player to single out for being crap! He does his job, I don't have an issue with him. Our defense is the one thing that is and has been sorted for years. Just need more onions in the auld onion bag.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 29 February 2008 Posted 29 February 2008 Surely its good for Mattock haveing an experienced LB at the club.
Thracian Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 He sounded today what we know he is, competent. He does the simple things consistently, makes himself available and doesn't complicate anything. That's fine to a point. But, Norwich apart, we've only scored three goals in the last seven games and, had we not got a lucky own goal today, then Clapham's part in our finding it difficult to score may havebeen more closely examined.
shiv Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 is it just me or is this bloke crap.Mattock is much better player .ive seen clapham play all of his games he has been woeful in all of them . does anyone agree? doesn't look like it
Lovejoy Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 is it just me or is this bloke crap.Mattock is much better player .ive seen clapham play all of his games he has been woeful in all of them . does anyone agree? Tbh most of the time Mattock is balls, so no. Clapham has been steady, if unspectacular. Mattock has got bags of potential, but atm Clapham is far better.
Stuliasz Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 He sounded today what we know he is, competent.He does the simple things consistently, makes himself available and doesn't complicate anything. That's fine to a point. But, Norwich apart, we've only scored three goals in the last seven games and, had we not got a lucky own goal today, then Clapham's part in our finding it difficult to score may havebeen more closely examined. I'd agree with what you are saying but considering our current situation, I'd happily stick with a steady Clapham rather than a volatile Mattock/Shush! or any other left back we might bring in to play in a more advanced full back role. Next season should be a different matter and if we are to push for anything worthwhile, we will probably need a better all round full back.
sdb Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 He sounded today what we know he is, competent.He does the simple things consistently, makes himself available and doesn't complicate anything. That's fine to a point. But, Norwich apart, we've only scored three goals in the last seven games and, had we not got a lucky own goal today, then Clapham's part in our finding it difficult to score may havebeen more closely examined. i don't think we've brought him in to solve our goal scoring problems
Thracian Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 i don't think we've brought him in to solve our goal scoring problems No, but in the end, it's all interconnected. But now't not the time to worry about it. Tonight's a time for celebration and that includes celebrating the part Clapham has obviously paid in helping us keep what's is our second best run of clean sheets in the season so far.
sdb Posted 1 March 2008 Posted 1 March 2008 No, but in the end, it's all interconnected. But now't not the time to worry about it. Tonight's a time for celebration and that includes celebrating the part Clapham has obviously paid in helping us keep what's is our second best run of clean sheets in the season so far. that's the spirit!!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.