Gibbo24 Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 Andy king was the worst player on the pitch today ! He needs dropping he is just not good enough . I forgot he was even playing today ! Why does Sven rate him so much ?
lcfcliam Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 Andy King is a quality player and has been since he made his debut but this season he has been woeful! Something needs to be changed and soon otherwise we can kiss promotion goodbye!
Corky Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 He's had a bad start to the season, very poor today. I don't think Sven does rate him that much in all fairness, unlike Wellens.
lcfcsnow Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 He's been in awful form since the backend of last season, appparently he was man marked but that doesn't excuse every other performance bar Derby this season. He has no urgency about his game at all, just strolls around receiving a pass and playing it back.
Kato Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 Paul Gallagher said himself during commentary that Andy King was man marked all game by Abdou. A lot of teams seem to set out to take him out of the equation this season. Watford didn't do that and in that game Andy King was involved in every good move we made. The lad is quality but teams are setting out to stop him showing it.
Kitchandro Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 King was no worse than Wellens, Johnson or Abe. The midfield is a nightmare. All have been performing below their potential. Odd considering we've bought loads of central midfielders.
Fox92 Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 I'm not pinpointing one player out after a dreadful performance, but I am not a big fan of him, I think he is very over-rated.
Thracian Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 King made several goal chances today, two of which should have been taken. He also made fewer mistakes than most. But for all that he looked knackered and totally unable to drive himself forward when the need arose. But who was better than mediocre today except Lloyd Dyer. I didn't understand Svven's substitutions. Yes, have Dyer and Vassell on to give width but why take a striker out? Yes Beckford was worse than diabolical and how he's displaced Schlupp I don't know. But times Dyer put really dangerous passes into the box and there was no-one to gobble them up in the box. King couldn't do it - he'd already covered too much ground. Wellens justs opts out in that department and Johnson isn't fit anyway. At 2-0 down we should have gone three at the back. We were so vulnerable anyway. better to have tried to put some pressure on by actually reinforcing the attack, which we did in part, but you do need finishers. Last three games, two at home, one win, two defeats for an aggregate 2-5. It's pathetic and I can't see we're improving as a team, quite the contrary. New management needed in my view.
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 Doesnt seem to be playing as freely as he was last season, and he is becoming even more anonymous. Though the whole midfield was rubbish today.
Narborough_fox Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 The worst player in the game? Wellens easily took that accolade. Kingy wasn't even in the top 3.
Stadt Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 I thought Johnson looked the best on the ball but still wasn't fully fit, and King is a poacher but doesn't have the energy to burst into the box.
Kitchandro Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 I thought Johnson looked the best on the ball but still wasn't fully fit, and King is a poacher but doesn't have the energy to burst into the box. He looks as if he's got technical ability (and we know he has from his early Man City days) but as you say he was playing as if not fit, way too slow to make up his mind and, as with everyone, didn't grab the game by the scruff of the neck.
dave the caveman Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 King is great at getting forward and scoring goals but there is little, if anything, more to his game than that. This would be fine if he were a striker but as a midfielder he has much more responsibility than just scoring. He reminds me a lot of Gareth Williams in that if he were just a little bit better he would slot well into a high quality, technical premiership team. But as things stand he is not skillful enough the premiership and not tough enough for the champ. He shouldn't be in the team given that Sven collected an abundance of central midfielders in the summer.
Thracian Posted 22 October 2011 Posted 22 October 2011 The worst player in the game? Wellens easily took that accolade. Kingy wasn't even in the top 3. Worse than King:- Peltier, St Leger, Konshesky, Abe, Beckford, Vassell, Fernandes. About the same: Schmeichel, Wellens, Nugent, Johnson. Arguably better: Lloyd Dyer. King was one of the few players to carve out genuine chances (3) apart from Dyer. But expecting him to play a box to box role while being closely marked in his third game in eight days was ridiculous.
ajthefox Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 I hate to say but if King has ever been anonymous it was today. Worst player on the pitch though? Give over. Beckford was a complete waste of space, Wellens actively made us less effective going forward, Johnson gave the ball away loads and no-one else really contributed anything of worth.
MC Prussian Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 I have yet to see the day when Thracian manages to criticise King.
MattyFromLE Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 I wouldn't say worst at all. Frustrates me so much, that I'd give anything to do their job. Anything, you name it I would probably do it. But they did not look bothered at all. Side ways passing, no urgency to get in the box. 2 perfect crosses into the box early 2nd half we should have been busting a gut to get on the end of it. Throwing ourselves at the ball. Connect with them both and we're 2-2. No urgency - pathetic. Absolutely appalling.
ajthefox Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 I have yet to see the day when Thracian manages to criticise King. had to laugh when I saw his response. Quelle surprise. I wouldn't say worst at all. Frustrates me so much, that I'd give anything to do their job. Anything, you name it I would probably do it. But they did not look bothered at all. Side ways passing, no urgency to get in the box. 2 perfect crosses into the box early 2nd half we should have been busting a gut to get on the end of it. Throwing ourselves at the ball. Connect with them both and we're 2-2. No urgency - pathetic. Absolutely appalling. I said the same thing to who I was sat next to and it's a very valid point. It's easy to sit in the ground and say it not knowing what it's like to be a footballer, but I'd give anything to be playing for City and they just didn't care for the most part. Kasper give him credit was, but then he was still rushing at 85 minutes. There is a limit.
Thracian Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 I have yet to see the day when Thracian manages to criticise King. I can easily criticise him. He was so knackered yesterday that he spent some of the time hiding. I've seen him do it before for the same reason. That doesn't negate what he contributed and what everybody seems to ignore...the fact that we could/should have had at least two goals from the three chances he created. You can always tell when King is knackered because he is always one-paced and doesn't have the energy to moved into a faster fear or to produce the odd bit of trickery. When he's tired he's always close enough to his opponent not to be chosen to receive a pass and this is what he did for spells yesterday. Trouble is half the team were tired yet Sven failed to play anyone who might generate a spark until after half-time. We really didn't help ourselves, especially with Danns and Fernandes being relatively fresh. King could easily have been used in a "less mileage" rolebehind the two strikers. Yes I understand it was tempting to start with the same side that beat Watford but Sven should have been able to gauge their sharpness well in advance and all of us could see the problem of fatigue when the match started. It was clear we needed an injection of impetus after barely 20 minutes so why we waited I've no idea.
MC Prussian Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 I can easily criticise him. He was so knackered yesterday that he spent some of the time hiding. I've seen him do it before for the same reason. That doesn't negate what he contributed and what everybody seems to ignore...the fact that we could/should have had at least two goals from the three chances he created. You can always tell when King is knackered because he is always one-paced and doesn't have the energy to moved into a faster fear or to produce the odd bit of trickery. When he's tired he's always close enough to his opponent not to be chosen to receive a pass and this is what he did for spells yesterday. Trouble is half the team were tired and Sven used no-one to generate a spark. Dyer wasn't tired. Why didn't he start. And why not use King in a "less mileage" role behind the two strikers given it was his third 90 minutes in eight days? And use Danns instead of Abe and Fernandes instead of Johnson to give the midfield more energy? We really didn't help ourselves, especially with Danns and Fernandes being relatively fresh. Yes I understand it was tempting to start with the same side that beat Watford but Sven should have been able to gauge their sharpness well in advance and all of us could see the problem of fatigue when the match started. It was clear we needed an injection of impetus after barely 20 minutes so why we waited I've no idea. I find it quite amusing how you manage to twist things around so they fit your bill, à la "King was always close enough to his opponent" (which is, in all honesty, fücking hilarious) when in fact, King was so nicely marked by Abdou and obviously so tired from Wednesday's game (without wanting to admit it publicly), that you have the nerve to turn his weakness into some kind of strength!!! King was one of those three players Sven mentioned in the Post-Match Phone-In that allegedly managed to trick him into thinking they were fit when they were clearly not. I applaud King for having the balls to pretend he's okay, but his over-eagerness and the over-eagerness of a couple of others to impress the manager has done the team as a whole a lot more harm than good. I hope King learns to listen to his body and will become more professional in his personal assessment in the near future. He did hardly anything yesterday and hardly anything correctly. Face it. You always manage to attribute some vague "contributions" to his play. I have yet to witness those "contributions". There are a handful of other players with equally as many "contributions" to the strikers as King's - why is it you never praise them??? His passes went astray, he remained anonymous for most parts of the game, he had little influence on our forward play - did he actually have a shot on goal?
Guesty Posted 23 October 2011 Posted 23 October 2011 He must be knackered all the time from what I've seen lately. Unless he scores he's pretty much anonymous (this was the same last year in most matches he didn't score). But last year we had more width to the team and he had more of a free role where his main objective was to score. The formation we play this year everything has to go through the middle. This really exposes his weakness'; especially his lack of creativity. I think it's time to move him a little further back and maybe try Johnson up there. But then if you put him further back he doesn't really seem to get stuck in all that often. He's like a poor mans Frank Lampard, stick him in a 4-3-3 and he'll score goals whilst the rest of the team let him play to his strengths. Put him in a 4-4-2 of any sort like Lampard for England and his weakness' get exposed.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.