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
LCFCkid

Carl Ikeme

Recommended Posts

Posted

I used to play in goal for my school team and for a five a side team.

I was gash for both so that makes me an authority on gash goalkeeping. Logan is an average goalkeeper and the only reason he's still here is the clubs he's been on loan to dont want him.

That really tells you all you need to know.

The only time i've seen this new fella play he was bloody awful so it really doesnt matter which one of them plays.

Hope this helps!

:dunno:

Haha very encouraging thanks for insight! :S:S

Posted

Because he looks about to make a horrific error every time the ball comes near him. He also has no command of his area, communication with the defence is non-existant, he has a tendancy to mis-judge crosses.

Basically, he is not the keeper you want if you are looking to challenge for promotion.

Generally, if one manager thinks a player is shit, they might just have made a mistake. When a succession of managers don't think someone is good enough, usually that's a pretty clear indication. Logan has got nowhere near our first team for about the past 5 years, under 156 different managers.

The 'Boro game at the end of last season is the only time I have ever seen him play competently.

At the end of the day, the guy is BACKUP to Weale, what sort of quality keeper wants to sit on the bench and play JUST in case there is an injury? its rare to have two amazing goalies, look at Man City, Shay Given is desperate to leave. Hey wait a minute, lets sign him!

Posted

Our goalkeeping coach, Mike Stowell, has done well in the past in picking loan goalkeepers. Warner, Stockdale and Bunn all did well for us in Division 1.

Stowell has Wolves connections as former player and, hopefully, Ikeme will do the job.

Posted

Our goalkeeping coach, Mike Stowell, has done well in the past in picking loan goalkeepers. Warner, Stockdale and Bunn all did well for us in Division 1.

Stowell has Wolves connections as former player and, hopefully, Ikeme will do the job.

What the hell has it got to do with Stowell?

Wouldn't have thought he'd be involved in signing players at all.

Posted

What the hell has it got to do with Stowell?

Wouldn't have thought he'd be involved in signing players at all.

I would expect his views to be sought as goalkeeping coach. As part of the goalkeepers' "union" like Tim Flowers I expect they keep their eyes open for goalkeepers who are available.

You may be entirely right. I didn't think my opinion was so left field or extraordinary.

Posted

Aw diddums, so I don't play the happy clapper game and I'm here to cause an arguement, grow up FCS.

Please tell me what qualities Conrad Logan possesses to be a #1 keeper in the Championship.

So you admit you are here to cause an argument, That shows you must be a pathetic, germ ridden little maggot. When you are eventually adult enough to climb out of your playpen, perhaps your brain will have developed. Until then, keep sucking your dummy.

Posted

I would expect his views to be sought as goalkeeping coach. As part of the goalkeepers' "union" like Tim Flowers I expect they keep their eyes open for goalkeepers who are available.

You may be entirely right. I didn't think my opinion was so left field or extraordinary.

Maybe. I'd be surprised though.

Oh, and isn't that link wrong? Surely Sousa was at Swansea by then...

Posted

So you admit you are here to cause an argument, That shows you must be a pathetic, germ ridden little maggot. When you are eventually adult enough to climb out of your playpen, perhaps your brain will have developed. Until then, keep sucking your dummy.

Ironic.

Posted

Maybe. I'd be surprised though.

Oh, and isn't that link wrong? Surely Sousa was at Swansea by then...

Wrong/incomplete information in link. Add in "2009" after "April 9th"

According to Wikipedia (dreadful source I know)

On 19 November 2008, Sousa was appointed head coach of Championship team Queens Park Rangers.[3] However, on 9 April 2009, he was sacked, as the club claimed he had divulged sensitive information without permission from the club hierarchy, namely Dexter Blackstock's loan move to Nottingham Forest having been agreed without his knowledge.[4]

Posted

Wrong/incomplete information in link. Add in "2009" after "April 9th"

According to Wikipedia (dreadful source I know)

On 19 November 2008, Sousa was appointed head coach of Championship team Queens Park Rangers.[3] However, on 9 April 2009, he was sacked, as the club claimed he had divulged sensitive information without permission from the club hierarchy, namely Dexter Blackstock's loan move to Nottingham Forest having been agreed without his knowledge.[4]

Yeah but Ikeme wasn't there in 2009... :unsure:

Posted

There's something about Logan's style of keeping that makes me feel uneasy, don't know what it is but I feel more comfortable with Weale in goal.

Posted

At the end of the day, the guy is BACKUP to Weale, what sort of quality keeper wants to sit on the bench and play JUST in case there is an injury?

You make a good point, I was merely reacting to the people who seem to want him to be first choice.

Posted

Seeing as we've got onto the subject of Conrad Logan and the inexplicable belief that he's a 'decent' goalie I thought I'd weigh in with my two penneth.

He's rubbish. Prove it? OK

10/11 - 2.33 conceded per game

Conrad v Leeds 1 goals against W

Conrad v Burnley 3 goals against L

Conrad v Macc 3 goals against W

09/10 - 0.5 conceded per game

Conrad v Boro clean sheet W

Conrad v Sheff Wed 1 goal against L

06/07 - 1.63 conceded per game

Conrad v Wolves 4 goals against L

Conrad v Barnsley clean sheet W

Conrad v Preston clean sheet W

Conrad v Birmingham 2 goals against L

Conrad v Norwich 2 goals against L

Conrad v Sheff Wed 4 goals against L

Conrad v Norwich 3 goals against L

Conrad v Derby 1 goal against L

Conrad v Preston 1 goal against L

Conrad v Plymouth 2 goals against D

Conrad v Sheff Wed 2 goals against D

Conrad v Stoke 1 goal against W

Conrad v QPR 1 goal against D

Conrad v Villa 3 goals against L

Conrad v Palace 1 goal against D

Conrad v Leeds 1 goal against W

Conrad v Southampton 2 goals against W

Conrad v Birmingham 1 goal against D

Conrad v Colchester clean sheet D

So in 24 games where Conrad has featured we've conceded 39 goals (1.6 per game), won 8, drawn 6 lost 10. He's kept 4 clean sheets in 24 games.

So if God forbid Conrad played the whole season we'd concede 74 goals, and gain 57 points. He's rubbish, end of.

Posted

So you admit you are here to cause an argument, That shows you must be a pathetic, germ ridden little maggot. When you are eventually adult enough to climb out of your playpen, perhaps your brain will have developed. Until then, keep sucking your dummy.

If people think I am argumentative then tough, I just can't understand how anyone can rate Conrad Logan as decent. Thank you FleckneyMike for putting this arguement to bed.

Posted

If people think I am argumentative then tough, I just can't understand how anyone can rate Conrad Logan as decent. Thank you FleckneyMike for putting this arguement to bed.

I was not talking about Logan, I was talking about the fact that you admit coming on here to argue, and not to discuss.

Posted

I was not talking about Logan, I was talking about the fact that you admit coming on here to argue, and not to discuss.

So what you are saying is I am not allowed to disagree with others or criticise some of the below standard players we have :dunno:

Send me your rules so I can abide by them :thumbup:

Posted

I was not talking about Logan, I was talking about the fact that you admit coming on here to argue, and not to discuss.

What's wrong with arguing? If you disagree passionately with something and people want to discuss not debate then you have to argue.

Posted

So what you are saying is I am not allowed to disagree with others or criticise some of the below standard players we have :dunno:

Send me your rules so I can abide by them :thumbup:

you don't just critcise the below standard players we have, you critcise all of them, no doubt if we had messi & ronaldo playing for us you'd still find something to critcise them for.

And you should also learn that all though it is fine to disagree (if everyone though the same about everything this forum would either not exist or be as dull as the dull as dishwater saying) you need to accept when you're wrong and not keep backing yourself into a corner (see the fryatt thread in transfer talk) - because if it is pretty much just you against everyone else your quite clearly wrong.

Posted

you don't just critcise the below standard players we have, you critcise all of them, no doubt if we had messi & ronaldo playing for us you'd still find something to critcise them for.

And you should also learn that all though it is fine to disagree (if everyone though the same about everything this forum would either not exist or be as dull as the dull as dishwater saying) you need to accept when you're wrong and not keep backing yourself into a corner (see the fryatt thread in transfer talk) - because if it is pretty much just you against everyone else your quite clearly wrong.

I would say he's right on Logan though.

Also your advocating argumentum populumin your final line.

Posted

I would say he's right on Logan though.

Also your advocating argumentum populum in your final line.

I agree that logan is poor, i've held that view for many a year - it's more his certainty that all of our squad is league 1 at best.

And as for he argumentum populum bit, while on occasion the majority can be wrong, it is more likely the minority is wrong. And since he seems to always be the minority it's more likely that he is wrong than everyone else.

Posted

And as for he argumentum populum bit, while on occasion the majority can be wrong, it is more likely the minority is wrong. And since he seems to always be the minority it's more likely that he is wrong than everyone else.

It's not more likely that the minority is wrong. The whole point of the 'argumentum populum' is that its a fallacy that just because a majority of people believe something to be true doesn't make it true.

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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