Stevie Synex Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Some people on here need to calm down..he was hardly Maradona FFS. Setting apart NP's 'favouritism', it's hard to see what we're losing tbh. Sure, he looks a better alternative to King and Wellens at the moment (but let's face it, who doesn't?), but that's mostly down to the fact you can never put in a bad performance when you're on the bench! The fact is, Fernandes didn't put in enough good performances to justify his place in a pisspoor midfield, EVEN under Sven, who brought him here in the first place. He was in every sense a Sven signing - too soft, lots of ostensible 'industry' but very little real impact on the game. Clearly hasn't been interested since Sven left so will chase the dollar signs elsewhere. Fair on him. I don't think we'll win anything with King and Wellens in midfield. But that doesn't mean to say Fernandes was the answer... Top Post - completely agree
Tielemans63 Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 I find this, (and not for the first time), to be really disappointing news But he joins a line of excellent 'loan' players that the Club have for whatever reason, either cast aside or failed to secure as permanent signings - Mark Davies, Tom Cleverley, Ben Mee and Kyle Naughton spring particularly to mind. To be fair the first two were never really an option and Kyle Naughton wanted Premier League football. Not much the club could have done in any case.
Jace Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Some people on here need to calm down..he was hardly Maradona FFS. Setting apart NP's 'favouritism', it's hard to see what we're losing tbh. Sure, he looks a better alternative to King and Wellens at the moment (but let's face it, who doesn't?), but that's mostly down to the fact you can never put in a bad performance when you're on the bench! The fact is, Fernandes didn't put in enough good performances to justify his place in a pisspoor midfield, EVEN under Sven, who brought him here in the first place. He was in every sense a Sven signing - too soft, lots of ostensible 'industry' but very little real impact on the game. Clearly hasn't been interested since Sven left so will chase the dollar signs elsewhere. Fair on him. I don't think we'll win anything with King and Wellens in midfield. But that doesn't mean to say Fernandes was the answer... Great post he's clearly a very talented and well respected player but on his day as a Leicester player was no better than any other he's not what we need right now. Pearson needs to build for the future and there is no point building around a player who's on loan and will be off again soon anyway lets get the big pointless Sven wages out and rebuild a decent Championship team properly even if it means looking foward to next season
Karljohn Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Wish him all the best, the debut at Cov will standout for me but it was only Cov, one of those players who's name sounds better than he is!
Thracian Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 This isn't Pearson's fault at all. Gelsons made it clear he wants to move and, whatever his previous record, he's never looked anything special in his time here. The bloke was a pointless signing and of no consequence to our club at all.
Adster Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 If Wellens and the rest of the useless shite midfield are still on the books come the end of January then NP can well and truly f**k off. Mate you need to chill out...
AdamN Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 I never saw Fernandes have a 'bad' game, and most of the games he was distinctly average in also happened to be matches where the entire team was playing shite. Cov has already been mentioned, where his passing and movement was simply a class above, but a lot of people are also forgetting matches like Forest (which kind of disspelled the myth that he can only be deployed as a defensive midfielder) and Derby, which probably the best collective performance from any City midfield this season (Fernandes, Abe, King and Danns). And yes, he might have came here because of Sven, but that didn't mean he wanted to sit on the bench for the rest of his time at the club. He showed that with his willingness to impress in the reserve game he requested to play in. I dare say that if he had been getting games then perhaps he'd be feeling a bit differently now. I can't blame the guy though. If the manager that brought me in on loan got sacked, and I was never given a chance under the new regime, then I'd want to fvck off elsewhere too. Udinese or Leicester City? Hardly a difficult decision really...
MrFox781 Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Dont wanna be here then goodbye however could have done with him.
Kitchandro Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 I never saw Fernandes have a 'bad' game, and most of the games he was distinctly average in also happened to be matches where the entire team was playing shite. Cov has already been mentioned, where his passing and movement was simply a class above, but a lot of people are also forgetting matches like Forest (which kind of disspelled the myth that he can only be deployed as a defensive midfielder) and Derby, which probably the best collective performance from any City midfield this season (Fernandes, Abe, King and Danns). And yes, he might have came here because of Sven, but that didn't mean he wanted to sit on the bench for the rest of his time at the club. He showed that with his willingness to impress in the reserve game he requested to play in. I dare say that if he had been getting games then perhaps he'd be feeling a bit differently now. I can't blame the guy though. If the manager that brought me in on loan got sacked, and I was never given a chance under the new regime, then I'd want to fvck off elsewhere too. Udinese or Leicester City? Hardly a difficult decision really... Passing and movement? He/We did very little of that in that game. We were average at best and Fernandes stood out because he won the ball in the middle countless times and played it simple. At Forest he did the same, closed down relentlessly (he's far better at this than Abe) and this is where the two goals came from, not from his passing and creativity, which are not his strong points. He is all about power and energy. He is a defensive midfielder and should have been played deep the whole time. This can partly but not exclusively be blamed for his inconsistency; at times he was very poor but less frequently than most of our midfielders.
Spudulike Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 This is how I feel really, some major overreactions on here. Sven didn't play him towards the end either, and it's not like he was winning games on his own. He was a defensive midfielder for god's sake. I'm not saying I didn't rate him, but considering most people think our main problem is creativity he's hardly the answer is he? His game wasn't even about passing. There are a lot of hypocritical people on here, when Sven was in charge there were so many lambasting and dismissing those who criticised Sven and said he didn't know what he's doing, they calling them impatient and biased against him. Now after a handful of games those same people are calling Pearson all sorts, before he's even had a chance to buy players, and telling him to 'fvck off' and the suchlike. I've heard it enough times and now it's time for me to say the same, some of you lot need to get a grip and stop judging the manager after a few games just because he's not Sven (the man who left us with this poor squad). Pearson is not immune from criticism and some have been fair but when you're elevating players like Fernandes to world class status then you clearly need to think twice before you question Pearson's role as manager.
accessory Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Best of luck to him in Serie A. If team selection was on footballing grounds alone, Fernandes should have been the first name on the team sheet. But it's no wonder he became dispirited, as others did before him, when players of far less ability were being chosen alongside or ahead of him. Even if we only saw him at his best in a handful of matches (Cov and Forest away, Derby at home), he showed infinitely more quality in those games then certain other midfielders have managed in the entire season to date. We can only hope that the manager has another midfielder, whether a permanent signing or another loan deal, lined up to replace him.
accessory Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 To be fair the first two were never really an option and Kyle Naughton wanted Premier League football. Not much the club could have done in any case. And the same applies here. Even if he'd featured regularly and we were top of the league, we would always have been struggling to resist the attentions of a top Serie A club like Udinese.
tylesta Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 A team 3rd in serie a must rate him yet........he doesn't get one start under np?? what about everyone getting a chance.
accessory Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 A team 3rd in serie a must rate him yet........he doesn't get one start under np?? what about everyone getting a chance. Much as it pains me to type this, maybe he never gave Pearson a chance, especially if he knew Udinese were interested in taking him back to Italy.
m00nie Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 This isn't Pearson's fault at all. Gelsons made it clear he wants to move and, whatever his previous record, he's never looked anything special in his time here. The bloke was a pointless signing and of no consequence to our club at all. has he??? what you basing this on ?? one lazy foreign article??
smudger63 Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Inevitable with a player who only came here for a manager & not for a single other reason Wish it had have worked out differently myself, he showed flashes of being really good, but like most (except Pelts, Kasper & probably Nuge & Konch) here failed to dominate play in his position & didn't hold his place down. If anyone don't want to be here they can feck off as far as I'm concerned Well maybe if Pearson had given him the chance, he would have wanted to stay here!The fact he asked to play in a reserve game, despite not being picked initially, showed he wanted to prove himself. Sadly, scoring 4 goals in that game wasn`t deemed as good enough to break into our dynamic midfield!
Danny the Fox 95 Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 You don't know how angry I am about this . Pearson would rather stick that fat twat Wellens in the team that have a very good defensive midfielder and a Swiss international,who in my opinion is too good for the Championship, and to add to that he works hard and never stops running. While Wellens does **** all and complains the whole while. This club is a joke!
accessory Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 You don't know how angry I am about this . Pearson would rather stick that fat twat Wellens in the team that have a very good defensive midfielder and a Swiss international,who in my opinion is too good for the Championship, and to add to that he works hard and never stops running. While Wellens does **** all and complains the whole while. This club is a joke! Fernandes is too good for the Championship - otherwise Udinese wouldn't have sniffed around him. What could Pearson have done to stop him moving?
Callabinho Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Fernandes is too good for the Championship - otherwise Udinese wouldn't have sniffed around him. What could Pearson have done to stop him moving? Stop being a stubborn cant and play him.
dannythefox Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 He only came here because of Sven which people are forgetting its not big deal I'm sure NP has his on loans he wants to bring in. Good player but was only here to see if we could get promotion then he would of playing for a premiership club and probably signed a two year deal.
The Doctor Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Fernandes is too good for the Championship - otherwise Udinese wouldn't have sniffed around him. What could Pearson have done to stop him moving? While he will not stay, can I point out that the loan was until the end of the season. That we'd got him for the next 6 months and he hasn't even got a chance under Pearson is greatly disappointing to say the least.
Guest Col city fan Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Thread is already full of t*ts Day after sven was sacked Fenandes was crying to the French press that he was leaving & wouldn't extend his loan beyond the minimum period everyone seems to have had collective amnesia of the fact he doesn't give 2 fecks about us & wanted out Yes it's a shame as on occasion he looked handy but slinging abuse around at others is out of context with the fact Fernandes wants nothing to do with our club This... If a player wants to leave you don't build a side around him What the fook was Pearson meant to do...Kiss his arse and plead for him to stay? I guess it's Wellens fault that Gelson wanted to leave?......
Happy Fox Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 NP should of given him a chance at the very least for the couple of games leading up to the January transfer window, it was not as if the central midfield was performing to a high standard during those games. I truly hope NP knows by now where the problems lie i.e the whole midfield.
Danny the Fox 95 Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 What could Pearson have done to stop him moving? Ummm...Play him.
lcfcsnow Posted 29 December 2011 Posted 29 December 2011 Are people actually surprised by this? It's been clear since his last stint that Pearson is a bastard to work with. I wouldn't be surprised if half the squad wanted out.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.