Kitchandro Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Next season. Season after. WE WILL BE SUCCESSFUL. MASSIVE. We've always had the potential, but the Thais are worse at picking managers than Mandaric. If only they'd pulled their fingers out their arses, forgot about the big names, and gone with someone unknown and ambitious. I mean someone really ambitious. Someone with seemingly crazy ideas and methods, but with a blinding amount of confidence in themselves. Someone who will work day and night, without sleep, mainly playing football manager in an attempt to achieve perfection. I mean the only name fitting of this guy would be the word 'ambitious' itself. But no. Top has ballsed it up again.
LCFC_FAN_1995 Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 If Sven spent £10 on Heskey and Given I would be disappointed. No way on god's earth they are worth that. However it is the mirror, so I'm not too worried. why are they even saying how much money we get to spend Sousa did that and we ended up paying £3million for him I would love Given but prefer not to have Heskey! unless we don't spend too much on him
Austin Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 We've always had the potential, but the Thais are worse at picking managers than Mandaric. If only they'd pulled their fingers out their arses, forgot about the big names, and gone with someone unknown and ambitious. I mean someone really ambitious. Someone with seemingly crazy ideas and methods, but with a blinding amount of confidence in themselves. Someone who will work day and night, without sleep, mainly playing football manager in an attempt to achieve perfection. I mean the only name fitting of this guy would be the word 'ambitious' itself. But no. Top has ballsed it up again. Bravo Sir! Bang on ..
Kitchandro Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 'Calm down, calm down', don't be so personnel. Don't get so upset. Where did you get this 'two up front' from. To remind you I said Wellens, King and Gallagher with two strikers ( could be and obviously was in a 4-3-3 formation ) left us weak defensively, and that was the main factor ( outside of goalkeeping ) that has lead us to a less successful finish to the season than we wanted. Am I wrong??? I love this bit 'neither Bruma or Abe are attack minded players'. NB In 45 minutes against a team above us in the table, we conceded nil and scored 3, yes 3! I'm not taking anything personal. Seems you are taking something Wellens did personally. Bruma has been mostly playing at centre back. Clearly he is not an attacking player. He scored 2 long rangers. The goalkeeper dropped a clanger for one of Yakubu's goals. These goals are not the result of a perfect midfield balance. They are just freak goals. Bruma's were great no doubt, but it doesn't make him a creative midfielder. We are not weak defensively because of King, Wellens and Gallagher, because none of them are defensive players. We have been poor defensively because a) our defence has been crap and b) the opposition are allowed to run at us through the middle when we lose the ball. This is what a holding midfielder is employed for, to protect the back four. By doing this he also makes the job of the more attacking and creative midfielders easier. If by 'two strikers' you mean 1 striker playing up front and 1 playing on the wing, then I'd agree, that has hindered us. We need a real winger who can beat a man. I'm still not hearing a good argument against Wellens though.
Kitchandro Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 We've always had the potential, but the Thais are worse at picking managers than Mandaric. If only they'd pulled their fingers out their arses, forgot about the big names, and gone with someone unknown and ambitious. I mean someone really ambitious. Someone with seemingly crazy ideas and methods, but with a blinding amount of confidence in themselves. Someone who will work day and night, without sleep, mainly playing football manager in an attempt to achieve perfection. I mean the only name fitting of this guy would be the word 'ambitious' itself. Actually, having read this back, it's Martin Allen case closed
MC Prussian Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Yes they are, that first 11 would lose no more than 3 games Sorry, but... I can't take you any more serious after that remark.
Guest shearfox Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Yes they are, that first 11 would lose no more than 3 games That might be the case on your FM but reality is different I'm afraid.
artursteppe Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 I'm not taking anything personal. Seems you are taking something Wellens did personally. Bruma has been mostly playing at centre back. Clearly he is not an attacking player. He scored 2 long rangers. The goalkeeper dropped a clanger for one of Yakubu's goals. These goals are not the result of a perfect midfield balance. They are just freak goals. Bruma's were great no doubt, but it doesn't make him a creative midfielder. We are not weak defensively because of King, Wellens and Gallagher, because none of them are defensive players. We have been poor defensively because a) our defence has been crap and b) the opposition are allowed to run at us through the middle when we lose the ball. This is what a holding midfielder is employed for, to protect the back four. By doing this he also makes the job of the more attacking and creative midfielders easier. If by 'two strikers' you mean 1 striker playing up front and 1 playing on the wing, then I'd agree, that has hindered us. We need a real winger who can beat a man. I'm still not hearing a good argument against Wellens though. Kitchandro, I've been following your banter with 'ambitious' and I'm on your side. However, forgive me, you are not concentrating enough with my little pieces. I stated that for most of the season playing Wellens, King and Gallagher with two strikers has been a major problem with our performances this season. Now to spell it out, what I mean is that we would have a better balance by swopping one of those five ( ie two strikers and Wellens, King and Gallagher ) for a proper defensive midfield player to give us that balance. I have just chosen Wellens to be the one, because I think King is young and has potential, Gallagher just has the edge on Wellens because Wellens is slow and is getting slower and slows down our movement forward. Tell me, if you went to the Burnley match, did you have your eyes shut, or did your blinkers have 'I love Richie no matter how slow he is' written on them?
Kitchandro Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Kitchandro, I've been following your banter with 'ambitious' and I'm on your side. However, forgive me, you are not concentrating enough with my little pieces. I stated that for most of the season playing Wellens, King and Gallagher with two strikers has been a major problem with our performances this season. Now to spell it out, what I mean is that we would have a better balance by swopping one of those five ( ie two strikers and Wellens, King and Gallagher ) for a proper defensive midfield player to give us that balance. I have just chosen Wellens to be the one, because I think King is young and has potential, Gallagher just has the edge on Wellens because Wellens is slow and is getting slower and slows down our movement forward. Tell me, if you went to the Burnley match, did you have your eyes shut, or did your blinkers have 'I love Richie no matter how slow he is' written on them? No in fact I was unable to go to the Burnley match, or the Watford match. But I think you said quite distinctly that one of our 2 priorities should be to get rid of Wellens. You still have not explained this comment, which has been reflected by a number of similar comments this week. You also said we could not have possibly come from behind to beat Watford with Wellens in the side. Unless Wellens has drastically gone downhill in the last 5 games you're going to find it hard to justify those comments.
Finnegan Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Kitchensink is Richie Wellens' stalker, Arthur. Don't mind his rampant frothing.
sphericalfox Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 I just can't believe Ambitious has managed to string along everyone for about 5-6 pages on this thread. What I will say is the lad has commitment to his wummery!
artursteppe Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 No in fact I was unable to go to the Burnley match, or the Watford match. But I think you said quite distinctly that one of our 2 priorities should be to get rid of Wellens. You still have not explained this comment, which has been reflected by a number of similar comments this week. You also said we could not have possibly come from behind to beat Watford with Wellens in the side. Unless Wellens has drastically gone downhill in the last 5 games you're going to find it hard to justify those comments. That explains it! You weren't at the Watford match. You would know everything I mean if you had been there. We were so much better without Wellens, SOOO much better! I have wanted it all season, and for the first time we could see what life would be like without him, and we found out, BIG TIME. I can't blame people for thinking what a great player he is, but he is a 'crowd pleaser', a poser, a fairweather when it's nice n easy type of player and we all saw the truth against Watford. I can understand that those who have always sung his praises might find it hard to admit, that maybe he isn't as good as they always thought - some of my closest chums are amongst them, but even they now admit the truth, and yes, they hate me for being right again. You are right, I did say to get rid of Wellens was one of the two main priorities, I'd forgotten, but I don't retract it.
Kitchandro Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 I just can't believe Ambitious has managed to string along everyone for about 5-6 pages on this thread. What I will say is the lad has commitment to his wummery! We've been laughing at him for the last 3 tbf
lcfcsnow Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 That explains it! You weren't at the Watford match. You would know everything I mean if you had been there. Oh believe me he wouldn't, this guy was Weales biggest fan until his comedy performance at Forest where he had no option to back down. Kitchandro -
Kitchandro Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Oh believe me he wouldn't, this guy was Weales biggest fan until his comedy performance at Forest where he had no option to back down. Kitchandro - I was just thinking, all this thread needed was a couple of cliche FoxesTalk muppets with a vendetta against me Now it's had everything Of course you'll need evidence for that statement to have any credibility
artursteppe Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Kitchandro, was it you who called me a WUM? It's you , you are obviously renowned as a WUM by others on this site! 'In bed' ( metaphorically ) with Weale and Wellens and now you have found out what they are really like!
Corky Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 We did improve after Wellens went off on Monday. That's not to say he hasn't done well under Sven, just that our performance was better.
MPH Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 We did improve after Wellens went off on Monday. That's not to say he hasn't done well under Sven, just that our performance was better. that will always happen here and there. you wont get a season where even the best players play the best for every game. Some teams develope a system to stop certain players playing well and think most of our attacking play comes through a specific player... I believe that player was wellens and his off game was also monday although he wasnt disasterously bad.. A different type of player came on for them to contend with...
Larry_LCFC Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Why do we even want Heskey. Yes hes from Leicester and yes he used to be .... decent .... but hes yet another player that is past it. We have Yak and Howard who are lazy enough without adding another Donkey onto the team. How about spending the money on some decent young talent instead of spending it on a bunch of premiership has-beens.
Stevosevic Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Why do we even want Heskey. Yes hes from Leicester and yes he used to be .... decent .... but hes yet another player that is past it. We have Yak and Howard who are lazy enough without adding another Donkey onto the team. How about spending the money on some decent young talent instead of spending it on a bunch of premiership has-beens. We won't get Heskey anyway, and clearly isn't past it considering he still plays most matches for Villa. Young talent? Sven has been doing that with the defence, people can't stop moaning, he can't win.
MrSpaM Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Why do we even want Heskey. Yes hes from Leicester and yes he used to be .... decent .... but hes yet another player that is past it. We have Yak and Howard who are lazy enough without adding another Donkey onto the team. How about spending the money on some decent young talent instead of spending it on a bunch of premiership has-beens. Yakubu's not even our player, and is probably going back to Everton at the end of the season, and Howards probably being sold too, so maybe we should start looking for a new 'donkey'
Larry_LCFC Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 We won't get Heskey anyway, and clearly isn't past it considering he still plays most matches for Villa. Young talent? Sven has been doing that with the defence, people can't stop moaning, he can't win. Yeah maybe he does. 8 goals in 62 appearances though for a premier league striker is frankly pathetic. We want someone who scores on a regular basis ... not another liability infront of goal which he clearly is.
FuriousFox46 Posted 27 April 2011 Posted 27 April 2011 Heskey Given Naughton Vitor Mee Bruma (IN MIDFIELD ONLY) Yakubu Kamara Not bad
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.