lildave3 Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Martin - 7 Gilbert - 7 Hobbs - 8 - Dominant. Morrison - 7 - Still constant HOOF. Mattock - 5 Oakley - 6 King - 7 Cleverly - 6 Dyer - 7 Howard - 8 Fryatt - 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ttfn Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Just can't believe you marked King that low. He and Cleverley eventually wrested total control of midfield on what was such a difficult pitch. He contributed in so many ways both in defence and attack, a clearance here, a change of direction there, feeds to left and right and the offer of a permanent out ball the more tha game progressed. It's funny we have very similar ratings but as ever you have inflated King's influence on the game. Our long ball tactics meant he was rarely in it and when he was, he failed to produce a single incisive pass and made one decent tackle as far as I recall. They're going to have to create an entry for 'King apologist' in the dictionary and put your face next to it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamL Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Martin 7 Gilbert 6 Hobbs 8 Morrison 7.5 Mattock 6 Oakley 6 King 6 Cleverley 7 Dyer 6.5 Howard 8 Fryatt 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Martin- 7 Gilbert- 6 Hobbs- 8 Morrison- 7 Mattock- 5 Oakley- 7 King- 7 Cleverley- 7.5 Dyer- 6.5 Howard- 8 Fryatt- 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 It's funny we have very similar ratings but as ever you have inflated King's influence on the game. Our long ball tactics meant he was rarely in it and when he was, he failed to produce a single incisive pass and made one decent tackle as far as I recall.They're going to have to create an entry for 'King apologist' in the dictionary and put your face next to it! Pity we don't have the benefit of a recording and I could show you an incisive pass inside the full-back, any number of passes that started or supplemented incisive moves, at least one vital clearance, lots of closing down that helped us regain possession, a shot or two, the awareness to offer colleagues a pass to get them out of trouble and so on. Not only that but, as so often, he covered space in such a way as to help restrict Northampton's way forward instead of being dragged ball-watching into positions that left space behind or around him to be exploited. King is never going to be a destructive tackler and, for much of yesterday's match, I didn't se the space or the options available for anyone to make lots of incisive passes. But what King did was to increasingly get the ball down onto the floor and encourage us to pass it, so denying Northampton possession and making them do ever more chasing. By the time our winner went in Northampton had all but had enough and, while you may call me an apologist, I was a fairly late poster yesterday and from what I can see most others felt King was worth more, and sometimes quite a lot more than five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ttfn Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Pity we don't have the benefit of a recording and I could show you an incisive pass inside the full-back, any number of passes that started or supplemented incisive moves, at least one vital clearance, lots of closing down that helped us regain possession, a shot or two, the awareness to offer colleagues a pass to get them out of trouble and so on.Not only that but, as so often, he covered space in such a way as to help restrict Northampton's way forward instead of being dragged ball-watching into positions that left space behind or around him to be exploited. King is never going to be a destructive tackler and, for much of yesterday's match, I didn't se the space or the options available for anyone to make lots of incisive passes. But what King did was to increasingly get the ball down onto the floor and encourage us to pass it, so denying Northampton possession and making them do ever more chasing. By the time our winner went in Northampton had all but had enough and, while you may call me an apologist, I was a fairly late poster yesterday and from what I can see most others felt King was worth more, and sometimes quite a lot more than five. Everybody has different opinions on the game but if we watched a recording I would be unable to pick out any 5-10 minute spell when King got hold of the game in the centre of midfield. He 'covered space' is one of those comments that people made to credit people without a lot of proof. Surely by being on the pitch he was 'covering space'. It's a shame football is played around what people do rather thana abstract concepts of 'covering space'. The lad barely touched the ball in the game and when he did, he never once did anything constructive with it. And your point about others rating higher - fair enough. But given that we saw the rest of the game the same way judging by our ratings, it would seem that your willingness to criticise others does not translate to King. Hence you are a 'King apologist' in the sense that you let King get away with stuff that others wouldn't. Has there been any game this season in which you've rated King amongst the 3 worst Leicester players? Don't try telling me that he hasn't been one of the 3 worst players this season in any one game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STUHILL Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 I thought King was ok but nothing more, I gave him a 6.5 which considering the general teams performance, was quite a generous mark. We could have quite easily drawn that match. Cobblers deserved a point for ther efforts and our general poor display. King for me made a couple of important tackles and broke up their attacks well but he didn't contribute more than Oakley in attack. I think if you anaylise a single player so closely like I think Thracian does with king, then you see a lot more than there actually is. I'm sure if other players were watched so intently and favourably, then they too would receive slightly higher marks. I do believe Thracian has a biased opinion of King whether he knows it or not so I normally just take a point off his King rating for a more honest score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Everybody has different opinions on the game but if we watched a recording I would be unable to pick out any 5-10 minute spell when King got hold of the game in the centre of midfield.He 'covered space' is one of those comments that people made to credit people without a lot of proof. Surely by being on the pitch he was 'covering space'. It's a shame football is played around what people do rather thana abstract concepts of 'covering space'. The lad barely touched the ball in the game and when he did, he never once did anything constructive with it. And your point about others rating higher - fair enough. But given that we saw the rest of the game the same way judging by our ratings, it would seem that your willingness to criticise others does not translate to King. Hence you are a 'King apologist' in the sense that you let King get away with stuff that others wouldn't. Has there been any game this season in which you've rated King amongst the 3 worst Leicester players? Don't try telling me that he hasn't been one of the 3 worst players this season in any one game! I was seated right on the halfway line and can assure you King touched the ball stacks of times and my mentioning of the way he covered spaces has nothing to do with his on-the-ball contribution. It is as much a part of the job as anything else and nothing to do with needing abstract proof. To a great extent City's position 10 points clear at the top of the table and having completed 15 League matches unbeaten says much for King's match-by-match contribution especially seeing as our manager has chosen to pick him in every League game and not to substitute him once. As for marking him low if he plays badly, don't ever doubt me on that one. I'd mark myself low if I had to, never mind him and have done so when I felt it justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe. Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Cleverley got in NOTW's team of the week for anybody interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salieri Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 I was seated right on the halfway line and can assure you King touched the ball stacks of times and my mentioning of the way he covered spaces has nothing to do with his on-the-ball contribution. It is as much a part of the job as anything else and nothing to do with needing abstract proof.To a great extent City's position 10 points clear at the top of the table and having completed 15 Lewague matches unbeaten says much for King's match-by-match contribution especially seeing as our manager has chosen to pick him in every League game and not to substitute him once. As for marking him low if he plays badly, don't ever doubt me on that one. I'd mark myself low if I had to, never mind him and have done so when I felt it justified. I didnt realise he hadn't even been subbed in a game! He must be doing something right and this experience will obviously do him wonders as he develops as a player. If anyone has benefitted by our relegation it has to be him as you have to wonder whether he would have had as many opportunities had we had stayed in the Championship. We will obviously need to strengthen if we go up, but I for one hope that King is not pushed to the periphary next season as I believe he could develop into a very fine player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 Cleverley got in NOTW's team of the week for anybody interested. Yeah I saw that. Pretty fair, he grew in the second half and linked up well with Gilbert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ttfn Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 I was seated right on the halfway line and can assure you King touched the ball stacks of times and my mentioning of the way he covered spaces has nothing to do with his on-the-ball contribution. It is as much a part of the job as anything else and nothing to do with needing abstract proof.To a great extent City's position 10 points clear at the top of the table and having completed 15 Lewague matches unbeaten says much for King's match-by-match contribution especially seeing as our manager has chosen to pick him in every League game and not to substitute him once. As for marking him low if he plays badly, don't ever doubt me on that one. I'd mark myself low if I had to, never mind him and have done so when I felt it justified. I've just taken the liberty of browsing through 10 games you've rated players on and in only one was King not in your top 4 players. Furthermore, for games you didn't even attend you have repeatedly questioned the judgement of those who were there from what you heard on the radio when they have criticised King's performance. Comments such as 'orchestrated the midfield in a quiet way' seem to get King bonus points where others would suffer. Let me ask you this, what does such a comment mean? King never seems to do anything to me. When he does, he looks a good player, but too many games pass him by. Good for the lad for playing every game this season but I don't think he deserves even half of the praise you ply him with! You have seemingly adopted a siege mentality over King, as is evidenced by the fact that you challenged my ratings despite the fact that we rated many of the players very similarly. But you seized on King, and it would seem that although we saw the rest of the game the same, you saw something in King which I did not, as you continually do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clazkel Posted 1 February 2009 Share Posted 1 February 2009 The last few games with Davies gone, King doesn't seem to get as much space and time on the ball. Davies seemed to bring the best out of King, as King had started to make runs and seemed alot more confident as he was passing the ball forward more than he used to. Im glad Pearson has given King the chance this season as hes doing a great job, but sometimes i wish he would put his foot on the ball and run with it and open play up, i find alot of the time he tends to pass back when he should go for it himself. Hopefully Cleverly will strike up a midfield partnership with King like Davies did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chesterfox Posted 2 February 2009 Share Posted 2 February 2009 These discussions re King are part of what make football so interesting - the fact that 2 people can see so different things. I think part of the reason that King has been an ever present is that he is a coach's dream - he is disciplined, is always in the right place at the right time and is the kind of player who gels the team. A mate of mine is a Level 3 coach(which is pretty high up) and I've learnt a lot from him over the years - and coaches do see things in a different way to us. As fans we are often focused on the ball but coaches often focus on the general positions of players off the ball and in this sense, I believe King would score highly ever time. It's still opinions though isn't it and at the moment NP's opinion is that he is clearly one of the first on the team sheet and to date he hasn't got many things wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houdini Logic Posted 2 February 2009 Share Posted 2 February 2009 Martin - 7Gilbert - 7 Hobbs - 8 - Dominant. Morrison - 7 - Still constant HOOF. Mattock - 5 Oakley - 6 King - 7 Cleverly - 6 Dyer - 7 Howard - 8 Fryatt - 5. Disagree - more than once i can remember Morrison calmly moving the ball out of the way of a charging player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collymore Posted 2 February 2009 Share Posted 2 February 2009 Howard 8 (Another major contribution. Northampton never managed to subdue him. Smacked his penalty home with assurance, held the ball up constantly and threatened to unlock Northampton on various occasions in the second half when the visitors were forced to push up and leave themselves exposed at the back. City looked so much better with him there than withouthim against Brighton). I thought he telegraphed where he was going to put quite badly with his run up. I think the goalkeeper might have thought he was playing double psychology, but it was pretty obvious he wasn't when all his weight went to the side. A better keeper might have guessed right. Still a good hit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 2 February 2009 Share Posted 2 February 2009 Disagree - more than once i can remember Morrison calmly moving the ball out of the way of a charging player. Just ocasionally the bloke was sublime. I had to rub my eyes in case they deceived me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcfc81 Posted 2 February 2009 Share Posted 2 February 2009 Just ocasionally the bloke was sublime. I had to rub my eyes in case they deceived me. Given time he will be quality, a very shrewed buy and has started to develop in the short time he has been here. His distribution is getting better I just feel sometimes he needs to get a bit meaner. I just hope we can sign Hobbs up because we could have a very good pair of centre backs for the future. Unlikely though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.