Corky Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 I don't want either up front on their own, have a pacy striker who can play on the shoulder of the defenders next to them so we can get in behind the opposition.
Guest Mee-9 Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 He's like a Mark De vries player really so a striker like Fryatt that gets the knock on ball with his feet and is good on the ball. So either Fryatt or Waghorn. Only Wymeswold Fox could compare Roman Bednar to the Akinbiyi-esque Mark De Vries. What about Elvis Hammond?
LCFCkid Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 To be honest I'd like to see vassell nd fryatt upfront!
J.Lisemore Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Big Howard fan, but think Bednar will come good, just needs a goal
CKB Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Howard every day. Bednar has had so much expected of him and he hasn't looked threatening at the goal, doesn't look very strong and even though he links play well he always seems to play with his back to goal. I think that he would be more suited to be played with a 2nd striker He's had 2 games for us..... Had a decent'ish debut and not so good second game.. Citeh fans obviously are disgusted he hasn't scored 6 goals in 2 games..... He's like a Mark De vries player Did you just compare him to MDV??? are you are crack?????????????? this is madness! Bednar. Ridiculous to judge him so early, typical bloody City fans. You'd have think some of you would have learned after Yuki Abe. Bednar isn't some questionably dodgy reject we've picked up on a free, he's a solid player with a proven track record. He's just massively out of match fitness and sharpness and needs to be played in to both. Steve Howard is over the hill. He isn't a ninety minute player any longer. When we give him a bit of a head start and send him on against tired legs he does come on fighting and he does galvanize us - so leave him to that role. Spot bloody on!!!!
CKB Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Bednar has been total turd in both games so far. Had Fryatt put in those 2 performances people would be burning effigies of him on the Narborough Road We don't have time to be playing Bednar in to form. We need to start scoring sooner rather than later. Sums up what i just said, and he hasn't been turd either.. Fryatt has been here alot longer and has always been up and down so how can you even compare them??? Even after his loan spell if he hasn't scored many you still can't compare them both as Fryatt has been here for ages! I see the headlines now CITY FANS IN DISGUST AS 2 GAME BEDNAR FAILS TO SCORE AND NOW DUBBED SHIT BECAUSE HE HASN'T SCORED 94 GOALS IN TWO GAMES!
Guest ttfn Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Sums up what i just said, and he hasn't been turd either.. Fryatt has been here alot longer and has always been up and down so how can you even compare them??? Even after his loan spell if he hasn't scored many you still can't compare them both as Fryatt has been here for ages! I see the headlines now CITY FANS IN DISGUST AS 2 GAME BEDNAR FAILS TO SCORE AND NOW DUBBED SHIT BECAUSE HE HASN'T SCORED 94 GOALS IN TWO GAMES! How long do we have Bednar for? I thought the whole idea of getting loan players in was that they were a short-term fix? As such, you'd expect some sort of fast return? And yes, Bednar has been turd so far. You must have been watching a different game to me on Monday night, because he was just as shit then as he was yesterday. Howard was poor when he came on yesterday but he's been doing a decent job for us. I'm sure he'll be a good option in weeks to come (his record at WBA was pretty decent), but we're not a creche where footballers can come and get their touch back for 2 months and then fook off back to the Premier League. As for the Fryatt comparison, yes you can compare them. They both play the same position. All I said was that if Fryatt had been that poor (disinterested, crap first touch, poor miss in first half) then he'd be getting slaughtered.
CKB Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 How long do we have Bednar for? I thought the whole idea of getting loan players in was that they were a short-term fix? As such, you'd expect some sort of fast return? And yes, Bednar has been turd so far. You must have been watching a different game to me on Monday night, because he was just as shit then as he was yesterday. Howard was poor when he came on yesterday but he's been doing a decent job for us. I'm sure he'll be a good option in weeks to come (his record at WBA was pretty decent), but we're not a creche where footballers can come and get their touch back for 2 months and then fook off back to the Premier League. As for the Fryatt comparison, yes you can compare them. They both play the same position. All I said was that if Fryatt had been that poor (disinterested, crap first touch, poor miss in first half) then he'd be getting slaughtered. Fast return?? come on man he's had 2 games! is he on loan till Jan or is it a month i'm not sure? You have to also take in he may not be fully match sharp and his confidence while surely boosted by him playing regularly may still be abit hit.. He has also stated he doubts he will end up playing for West Brom again so a full time move here in Jan may well happen.. I do agree with the creche comment though as all these loanees while improving our squad is a tad worrying if they all go back and we are stuck with getting in replacements and more or less a 3rd new back line this season! Well i thought Bendar was ok on Monday, could have scored, had a hand in the goal we scored and overall i was pleased Ok Fryatt has been here now for 4 years and in that time he has been so hit and miss it's unbelievable, he has not progressed as a footballer at all and is so frustrating it makes me wanna tear out my hair (the hair i have left that is) So to compare Bednar because he's also a striker is wrong and to also compare him to Fryatt after 2 games is wrong also.. I think alot of Citeh fans have a right to go apeshit at times with Fryatt because how long he has been here for and what they see Fryatt 166 games Bednar 2 games Come on fella!
The Padster Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Wow, just wow at some of the comments on here. Bednar is League One at best ?! Put the crack pipe down son and have a look at what he did for WBA in the championship. If people want to compare him with Fryatt then let's see. Quite conviniently Fryatt has been at Leicester as long as Bednar has been playing in the UK and as most people say the Scottish Premier League is akin to The Championship it makes everything nice and easy. Bednar since the 05-06 season played in the Scottish Prem for 1 full season, The Championship for 2 full seasons and The Premier League for 2 full seasons. In that time he has appeared in 125 league games and scored 41 times. Fryatt since the 05-06 season has played 4 full seasons in The Championship and 1 full season in League One. In that time he has appeared 163 times in league games and scored 50 times. Bear in mind that this includes Fryatts prolific season in League One where he scored over half of his total goals since joining Leicester. Bednar can easily do a job for us in this League and to say he can't after 2 games in frankly pathetic.
Tewy5 Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Bednar will do a good job for us but still luv big steve holds the ball up well and links up well
Finnegan Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Total turd in both games? What? He made the goal against Forest.
Tuna Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Bednar is the better player. We've been looking to Howard for far too long.
hackneyfox Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Bednar. Ridiculous to judge him so early, typical bloody City fans. You'd have think some of you would have learned after Yuki Abe. Bednar isn't some questionably dodgy reject we've picked up on a free, he's a solid player with a proven track record. He's just massively out of match fitness and sharpness and needs to be played in to both. Steve Howard is over the hill. He isn't a ninety minute player any longer. When we give him a bit of a head start and send him on against tired legs he does come on fighting and he does galvanize us - so leave him to that role. Spot on
ajthefox Posted 5 December 2010 Posted 5 December 2010 Bednar hands down. He needs at least a couple more games to settle in. 2 games without a goal and people are saying he's not good enough? what an absolute joke. Who in our team has even close to a 1 goal every 2 games ratio bar king? Howard? Fryatt? Waggy? Vassel? Gallagher? these are the players the fickle people say are shit and then are saying that after 2 games we should replace bednar. fook me. The first will take time but I'm sure once he gets it he'll bag few. And besides, as has been said Howard has done best this season off the bench against tired defenders.
smokey Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 I agree, why not play a 4-3-3 Weale Naughton Davies Vitor Cunningham Abe King Wellens Vassell Waghorn Gallagher We could be deadly Deadly!!!! Are you having a laugh??, all three are ok players don't get me wrong but not one of them will get anywhere near 20 goals a season. I think we have a good squad and as good as anyone else in this League as no one as impressed me yet, our problem is we desperately need a 20 goal man and we find him we could still win this league, remember Sunderland when Keane took over.
muzzy1981 Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 Bednar all the way! He has the potential to Boss this league. Sick off impatient t###s
MikeyT Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 It's early days yet, will see after Bednar plays a couple more games.
Kitchandro Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 I don't think we can judge Bednar after 2 games. Having watched Howard against Derby and Bednar against Forest, I'd have to say Howard did a better job. He just has an immense physical presence and he roughs them up a bit, and he holds it up better. Bednar tried his best and got slowly better as the game went on but he didn't really have too much of an impact. That said, I assume Bednar has been brought in as an answer to our goalscoring problems. In that case he has to be given a chance because Howard's goalscoring is not the best. All I would say is that he hasn't got long to convince, he's only here until January and we need to start winning games. Basically, he needs to start scoring to warrant a starting place ahead of Howard.
Wymsey Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 If Bednar missed an open goal opportunity on Saturday then i am sorry but he is not the answer to converting our chances successfully. Rather keep Howard on.
orangecity23 Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 If Bednar missed an open goal opportunity on Saturday then i am sorry but he is not the answer to converting our chances successfully. Rather keep Howard on. Because Howard has never missed an open goal opportunity ... Oh wait, he has. On numerous occasions. Shit the bed, we can't play Howard either then. Maybe Fryatt - but he's missed open goals too. And Waghorn, and Gallagher. And Vassell. Oh noes, we can't play any of our strikers! Bednar is clearly rusty, but playing upfront on his todd is a thankless task. I thought he had a very decent second half against the Trees, and showed a bit more of what he can do. He'll get better, and when he's fit, he's physically stronger than all our other strikers bar Howard, and he's significantly quicker than Big Steve. Howard struggles to keep going for a full 90 minutes, week in week out these days, so we need an alternative any way, and Bednar has had plenty of success in this league in the past, and will do again once he shakes off the ring rust.
Finnegan Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 I don't think we can judge Bednar after 2 games. Having watched Howard against Derby and Bednar against Forest, I'd have to say Howard did a better job. He just has an immense physical presence and he roughs them up a bit, and he holds it up better. Bednar tried his best and got slowly better as the game went on but he didn't really have too much of an impact. That said, I assume Bednar has been brought in as an answer to our goalscoring problems. In that case he has to be given a chance because Howard's goalscoring is not the best. All I would say is that he hasn't got long to convince, he's only here until January and we need to start winning games. Basically, he needs to start scoring to warrant a starting place ahead of Howard. Again, Bednar not have much of an impact? I reiterate - he made the goal against Florist, by getting on to a through ball (that Howard would not have,) holding it up and putting in an attacking team-mate; what more exactly is he supposed to be doing? I imagine Sven has hopes that Bednar will score goals more than Howard, yes, his record at this level (and in the Premiership) for West Brom is better than Howards has been for us. But given our system hasn't exactly changed I would also imagine that Bednar is in to play the target man's role, as well. I want him to start scoring goals, yes, but I don't think it's the only criteria on which he should be judged IF the same is said of Howard.
Kitchandro Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 Again, Bednar not have much of an impact? I reiterate - he made the goal against Florist, by getting on to a through ball (that Howard would not have,) holding it up and putting in an attacking team-mate; what more exactly is he supposed to be doing? I imagine Sven has hopes that Bednar will score goals more than Howard, yes, his record at this level (and in the Premiership) for West Brom is better than Howards has been for us. But given our system hasn't exactly changed I would also imagine that Bednar is in to play the target man's role, as well. I want him to start scoring goals, yes, but I don't think it's the only criteria on which he should be judged IF the same is said of Howard. Look at the first half against Derby. Howard was getting into them from minute one and was massive for us that day. We wouldn't have bossed the game like we did without him. Bednar did play a part in the goal and he got better as the game went on, but I didn't feel he was as involved as Howard was against Derby. In the first half Bednar couldn't really get involved. I thought overall our performance against Derby was better. I'm not getting on his back after 2 games but I do think he will be judged on his goal scoring as essentially that's what he's been brought in for.
The Year Of The Fox Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 howard everytime from what ive seen so far
North-LondonFox Posted 6 December 2010 Posted 6 December 2010 Probably Howard on current form but I think (hope) with some games under his belt Bednar will prove to be a top player at this level.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.