foxaholic Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 I have followed the City since the mid fifties and whilst football is all about opinions I have never known the supporters to be divided about so many players . Apart from the goalkeeper and Tunchev who is on loan and Schupps every one else fall into either top class or rubbish . King and Wellens are either our best two players or not worth a place in the side . At Cardiff I didnt go but Radio Leicester made King man of the match but numerous people said hewas again invisible perhapssomebody can enlighten me .
Tielemans63 Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 I like Kingy but he was never man of the match in that game. He started quite well and was then fairly anonymous. Bamba and Millsy were our best players IMHO.
Guest MattP Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 Mills was MOM by far. Followed by a couple of ball boys and my pillow.
funkyrobot Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 Yeh Millsy was motm for city against Cardiff. Tbf to king he was slightly less anonymous than abe and fernandes on the day. I think there has always been massive opinion differences, just in the past there wasn't internet to share your thoughts. I'm sure someone out there actually rated jimmy willis all those years ago?
Thracian Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 King is only grudgingly rated (at best) by some fans because he's not physically demonstrative. They'd rather have headless chickens like Tiatto was. King doesn't dive into spectacular tackles or waste the ball with near impossible passes he just quietly does a job depending on demands. Indeed he is one of our most versatile players in that he can pass, score, create, defend, head the ball, read the game and shadow people constantly. Yes, he's a bit one-paced but the fact that lots of outstanding midfielders were one-paced and not even as quick as King is ignored. The stats concerning King are there in black and white and go to prove he's a consistently good player and far more effective than anyone else in the club in terms of goals and shots while being second best on assists and best in the three combined. Marbella has rightly suggested we need to have King playing slightly further back so as to negate the much closer marking of him nowadays (opponents recognise him as a major threat even if some of our fans don't), to encourage his late runs, to ensure a lot more accurate final passes and to make use of his ball retaining ability/reading of the game in the centre of midfield. But whoever is in that role there needs to be width and pace on either flank as well as down the centre and too often it's lacking. Going 3-4-3 or 3-5-2 would sort that.
Fox92 Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 I don't think anybody can enlighten you. Mainly because football is all about opinions, as you stated, so there will always be divided opinions. However, a personal opinion is just what you personally think, and it doesn't mean one person is right and the other person is wrong. Just for the record, I thought Mills was man of the match against Cardiff City. He was a rock at the back. I thought I was watching Lucio
Thracian Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 Just for the record, I thought Mills was man of the match against Cardiff City. He was a rock at the back. I thought I was watching Lucio So did I. But the stick King took for missing a chance that should have been likely match-winning penalty was just typical of some people wanting to knock the bloke at every opportunity.
Fox92 Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 So did I. But the stick King took for missing a chance that should have been likely match-winning penalty was just typical of some people wanting to knock the bloke at every opportunity. True. I don't think anybody can really blame him for that chance, he was between two defenders and was being pulled by his shirt. In my opinion, he did well to stab a foot at it.
Topman Posted 29 September 2011 Posted 29 September 2011 U guys think the rating by the mercury is biased? Abe never ever has a good comment "had a quiet game" then wellans " usual competitve self" abe was better than wellans, no matter how shit a game king has, always has a good comment, rob tanner sort it out and give us a truthful rating
Brainy Posted 30 September 2011 Posted 30 September 2011 Wow I thought this was a gen. chat thread called split onion
Hollism94 Posted 30 September 2011 Posted 30 September 2011 U guys think the rating by the mercury is biased? Abe never ever has a good comment "had a quiet game" then wellans " usual competitve self" abe was better than wellans, no matter how shit a game king has, always has a good comment, rob tanner sort it out and give us a truthful rating The mercury ratings are crap. Kasper's kept 3 clean sheets in a row and has been rated 7 each time. If anyone has an average game, they are rated 7. If they don't get noticed it's a 6, if they come off it's a 5, and if they score it's an 8!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.