Sods Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 I think you're a complete utter idiot to be honest.Neilson doesn't offer our team anything and he can't defend. DavieG said get use to it because he's sign a 3 yr contract .... How many contracts has Milan cancel again ? Seriously why would you accept someone who isn't good enough ? How many contracts has Milan cancelled that Nigel Pearson has signed? The point is irrelvent to be honest, the fact is Neilson will be involved whether people like it or not. To be honest the guy can't go forward but he can put a tackle in, for that reason he should be in the team to smash the opposition.
marbelladave Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 For once, Marbella Dave, I agree entirely with your post!!! McGivern is worse it was he who was at fault on Sunday!!! Worrying! However McGivern is not the issue either, it is the sense of panic that infects the whole back 4 when faced by a mobile attacking unit. Some serious work from Pearson is desperately needed!
Lillehamring Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 um, what evidence is there to suggest that gilbert would be any better? and he was no more at fault for the goal then the other half dozen players that contrived to lose and/or fail to win back possession, and even then it was deflected twice, so really it was just a freak goal, no player can be faulted in that situation, that the ball got to where the deflections occurred was the combined fault, as i say, of several players.
morris1234 Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 hes crap, no pace, hes got no first touch, he cant pass, hes got club feet and to be honest even his throws arent that great! he takes too long with them for one and two, i think oakley has a longer throw! he also has NO footballing brain, hoofball is his game! SHOCKING! get morrison at right back!
marbelladave Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 If Pearson's going to continue to pick Oakley as a wide third central midfielder, we do really need someone who can overlap, create the extra man and cross a football. Neilson's probably never going to be that man as an obviously limited footballer, but the hate parade on here and Facebook is pathetic. Given the lack of composure in our back 4 I would restrict Neilson to defensive duty and make Oakley provide the width, if he can't then he has to drop down to the bench and play someone who can!
CupidStunt Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Why is Robbie Nielson in the starting line up, he is well out of his depth and cost us a goal on Sunday, granted he can throw a ball but he was well off the pace and possibly in two seasons of seeing championship and league one football one of the worst right backs I have ever seen. I would rather Morrison shift to right back or bring back Kerrea Gilbert. How much did Hearts pay us to take him away from them, as this is the second crap right back the club has had off them. I did notice watching the game back on Sky + when i came back from the game, he gave away an uneccessary corner and the look of digust given to him from Wayne Brown and another player told me they equally thought he was crap!! He must be crap he lost his place over a year ago in the Scotland national team and they are about as good as Derby I agree in most parts, but infairness he didnt cost us the goal, it was morrison iirc who got outpaced with ease to lose the ball in the first place, when he was odds on favourite to get there first I must admit though, albeit a trier, he just doesn't cut it for me
maddog Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Neilson is very good at getting forward up the right wing, always finds space and gets into great attacking positions. I think he's decent at tackling and ok at heading aswell. If we actually had a right winger Neilson may just stay back and concentrate on defending but with Twat Oakley nowhere to be seen he has to go forward. If he doesn't we would have fook all up the right and would have to rely even more on Dyer whom we already have the last few games and he will eventually just be marked out of matches. The fans attacking of Neilson is a lot worse than anything i've ever said about Howard. Just shows what hypocrits some people are, they can't believe you heavily criticise one player yet heavily criticise another themselves, and in Neilson's case with little reason. He's very slow and lacks basic ball skills, if he improves his passing/crossing he will be a very very good player. If we actually have a right winger he could just stay back more and focus on defending. In some games Neilson has been our only attacking outlet up the wing with Gallagher drifting inside on the left and Oakley nowhere to be seen on the right, without Neilson we would have no width at all sometimes.
C-man Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Given the lack of composure in our back 4 I would restrict Neilson to defensive duty and make Oakley provide the width, if he can't then he has to drop down to the bench and play someone who can! Yeah, I'd drop Oakley.
Legend_in_blue Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 In the summer there was hardly a wealth of talent to choose from at RB position. May I suggest someone on here offer a name which we could have put a bid in for that would have been a better option? Mentioning Gilbert does not count. And no, he isn't a better alternative, he's far too lightweight and luckily for him his pace got him out of trouble on more than one occasion last season against weaker opposition. In this league he wouldn't stand a chance, he'd be bullied out of it before he'd even run two yards. Does it not surprise that lowly P'boro have gone in for him and noone else? Does that not send the alarm bells ringing? Obviously not. People do not see the obvious. They just see red, run with an idea and everyone joins the bandwagon. I'd rather have a physical presence in the back line, than some lightweight, who isn't afraid to mix it and get stuck in and give it all. That's exactly what is needed in this league. You want to compete, then don't sign lightweight. We had three seasons of this with the likes of Newton etc who didn't cut it. And people saw red, they ran with an idea and they joined the bandwagon. Roll forwards 4 seasons, we're fifth, easily competing at this level, and people have to find fault with an individual. Yet they don't even choose the right player to have a go at. 5th in this league and people have to find fault. Absolute nonsense.
marbelladave Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Yeah, I'd drop Oakley. Which of course begs the question......who?
C-man Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 I agree in most parts, but infairness he didnt cost us the goal, it was morrison iirc who got outpaced with ease to lose the ball in the first place, when he was odds on favourite to get there first No, that was Neilson. He was too busy looking for where Jon Walters was rather than sprinting to the ball to clear into touch. Very lackadasical.
C-man Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Which of course begs the question......who? For who you mean? Probably N'Guessan or Gradel once he's back. Just someone who will excite the crowd by attacking the full-back.
marbelladave Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 For who you mean? Probably N'Guessan or Gradel once he's back. Just someone who will excite the crowd by attacking the full-back. The obvious answer but when either of them have played there we have had huge problems holding center midfield, the reason for deploying Oakley narrow right in the first place. More radical change is needed I'm afraid!
fatmando Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 IMO the best current defensive option in a back 4 would be:Morrison Brown Hobbs Berner I don't like moving Morrison, but what can you do with limited options. To say that he is a scapegoat is highly unusual as I have never seen him play well. I think he genuinely does his best, but is not up to the standard required. I am not a hater, like I was for Alan Rogers for instance, but it is an observation that he is not good enough. I agree with this. I also think Oakley is not providing enough on the right side and for me doesn't get in the first 11 with Wellens and King in, Danny on the right for me.
clazkel Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 I'm not a massive Neilson fan but i think he gets alot of stick that is undeserved. He is a defender, yet he seems to be our width on the right. If he had a winger in front of him then he could get on with his job of defending. He gets alot of the ball which makes him stand out, but the team isn't balanced imo with Oakley on the right, he should be in the middle and Nicky Adams on the right. Neilson gets isolated alot when Oakley doesn't stay wide and i feel some of the stick is undeserved as Neilson is getting asked to push forward and give width which i dont think he is comfortable doing. The midfield need to support the forwards more rather than relying on McGivern and Neilson to cross the ball in the box
Joe. Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Get Neilson out the 1st team!Why pick on him? Other than the fact that, so I am told, he appears to be composed entirely of fecal matter what has he actually done wrong? He works hard and does his best in the near impossible job of playing right fullback and right wing, both at the same time. He is no worse at his defensive job than Brown or for that matter, Oakley in his current right sided role. He is being used as a scapegoat by those who simply can not come to terms with the extremely limited capabilities of our current team and their need to find an 'instant' fix. Our current high position in the Championship is due to determined hard work, organisation and team spirit, of which Neilson is an integral part. Morrison in needed in a central position and Gilbert does not actually play for us, who else do you suggest? Hang on, I'll get my boots........ Finally some sense. Some complete cretins amongst our fans, I really don't know what they expect sometimes.
Bryn Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 He just looks very slow to me. Both in terms of thinking, reacting and physically. And it lets him down a bit. It's a position which we should look to strengthen if possible and cost-effective, but otherwise he'll do.
Edmund Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 He is a defender, yet he seems to be our width on the right. If he had a winger in front of him then he could get on with his job of defending. He gets alot of the ball which makes him stand out, but the team isn't balanced imo with Oakley on the right, he should be in the middle and Nicky Adams on the right. Spot on
Dom_Harborough Fox Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 IMO Neilson hasn't looked good enough for most of the season. In fairness to the bloke he does try hard & defensively I don't think he is too bad. His positioning is ok & he's a decent tackler but what worries me is that he has very little pace or ability when in possession & its even simple things like short passes that he seems to struggle with at times as well. I'd love it if he started to improve and shut everyone up but I don't see it happening realistically and especially at his age I don't think there is all that much more top come from him. At least with McGivern, who I thought was worse than Neilson on sunday, he is young and has the potential to improve and grow in to a good player. I just don't see the same happening with Neilson. That said, we don't have that many options at the back at the moment so I don't think there are a great many alternatives to playing Neilson & so maybe people should get off his back a little bit, recognise the fact that he does at least give 100% week in week out and hope that he can pull his level up a bit until players return from injury or we get someone in & we have more options at the back.
Katy Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Arguably one of Nige's worst buys. I really don't rate him at all and feel more confident with Berner and Morrison at the back to be honest. Not massively controversial, but if we were to accidently on purpose get rid of him in the transfer window then it would be no bad thing.
Spiritwalker Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 The fact that he is on a 3 year contract should not deter us signing another r.back, it is not unheard of to have 2 r.backs at a club and he would be reasonable back up. Morrison at r.back is a no brainer for me, he has the same problems going forward as Neilson and is needed at c.back. I also share the concern of those who think Gilbert is not the answer, he is quick but could be too light weight for the Champ
Narborough Bod Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Neilson needs help on the right hand side in my opinion, he is such a limited footballer that he can't do it himself, that means playing someone infront of him. I lost count the amount of times he had the ball but all he could do is hit it down the line to nobody or smash against defenders legs. He doesn't have the ability to take people on. He's not great and we could do better but he's not that bad, you can see him struggling at home when fans are clearly getting on his back. Despite sticking up for him a little bit , I would still play Morrison at right back on Saturday. Pretty much this, he's not the best and it does drive me mad that he can't play a first time pass and always has to take a touch. However, from watching him very carefully on Sunday it was clear to see on numerous occasions that no one in the team supports him. time after time he got the ball abnd was left with no city player within 20 yards, hence having to play the hoof up the line. Watch it next time and you'll see him isolated on countless occasions during the game. He needs a right sides player who sticks on the right and doesn't drift in permanently.
MPH Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Never Been Nielsens biggest fan. BUT I think there are a few that are not pulling their weight....
Trav Le Bleu Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Not seen many games this season and never been that big a fan of Neilson, but I think he did ok on Sunday. In all fairness, when was the last time City had a really good right back? I see Kaamark listed as a RB elsewhere, but I seem to remember him playing mostly centre and left for City.
Finnegan Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 Pretty much this, he's not the best and it does drive me mad that he can't play a first time pass and always has to take a touch.However, from watching him very carefully on Sunday it was clear to see on numerous occasions that no one in the team supports him. time after time he got the ball abnd was left with no city player within 20 yards, hence having to play the hoof up the line. Watch it next time and you'll see him isolated on countless occasions during the game. He needs a right sides player who sticks on the right and doesn't drift in permanently. Spot on. I really don't understand the hate, to be honest. He's far from Ronaldinho but if he strikes you as the worst thing in our side at the moment then you've got issues. The shape and the creativity of our midfield is far more troubling, as is our unfortunate obsession with bypassing them with thumping longballs that never seem to find Howard. End of the day, the Championship may not be an immense standard of football but we're where we are in the league out of merit. I don't think there's any massive, staggering faults in the team that urgently need correcting. We do need improve in certain areas if we're to stay in the hunt but, despite recent injury worries, I don't think right back is our most pressing concern. McGivern worries me more than Neilson and even he's moderately capable. I'd be looking at our more forward moving players, really. We really need to find someone as well as Fryatt to start knocking in the goals, be it a midfielder advancing from the middle, a winger to provide more wide distribution for one of our tall strikers in the air or just signing striker no. 2579325. Fryatt's not a one man team.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.