The Real Problem

[Kitchandro]

inconsistency means that a player doesn't always play at the same level. It has nothing to do with being good. A crap player can be consistent and they usually are - it's easier to be consistently bad than consistently good.

Still If you disagree with me that's fine, it's a discussion forum.

If I understand you correctly then ALL the Leicester players are shit because no-one, not even Kasper, has played great in every game.

The other week I saw Messi have a really poor game - he must be shit too.

Messi has a bad game every 20.

Lloyd Dyer has a good game every 20.

Can you see the difference?

[unreachable]

inconsistency means that a player doesn't always play at the same level. It has nothing to do with being good. A crap player can be consistent and they usually are - it's easier to be consistently bad than consistently good.

Still If you disagree with me that's fine, it's a discussion forum.

If I understand you correctly then ALL the Leicester players are shit because no-one, not even Kasper, has played great in every game.

The other week I saw Messi have a really poor game - he must be shit too.

I would substitute "average" for "shit".

[Kitchandro]

So of all our players you are stating that Beckford is the only high quality player. We must come from different planets.

No. I'm saying Beckford is one of the few players in our squad who has had a poor season but who might actually be a quality player. Maybe Danns too. Nugent, Konchesky and Schmeichel have been consistent.

If we've got so many quality players why have we had 2 different managers and we're still midtable?

[Guest]

You don't seem to grasp the meaning of ordinary English.

To be a quality player you have to play consistently well - does that make it any easier to understand?

Condescending.

I've watched England games where every player seemed to be crap - therefore in your world they are.

I've watched Messi have poor games - he must be crap.

I've seen Pele, Maradona and Frankie Wortho have poor games they must be shit.

Leicester are in the championship. Many of the players have the required quality to put us in the promotion places. they don't have the consistency to do that.

[Guest]

Messi has a bad game every 20.

Lloyd Dyer has a good game every 20.

Can you see the difference?

Messi doesn't play in the championship. Dyer does. And you are the one talking about dyer. I'm talking about EVERY Leicester player.

Can you see the difference?

[Kitchandro]

Condescending.

I've watched England games where every player seemed to be crap - therefore in your world they are.

I've watched Messi have poor games - he must be crap.

I've seen Pele, Maradona and Frankie Wortho have poor games they must be shit.

Leicester are in the championship. Many of the players have the required quality to put us in the promotion places. they don't have the consistency to do that.

That's because they are, at international level. Mentally as much as anything.

As for the rest of it, see my above post about Messi and Dyer.

[Kitchandro]

Messi doesn't play in the championship. Dyer does. And you are the one talking about dyer. I'm talking about EVERY Leicester player.

Can you see the difference?

I know, Messi plays in La Liga and is consistent. Dyer plays in the Championship and is wank 9 times out of 10.

What do you mean you're talking about every Leicester player? What are you getting at?

[Guest]

I would substitute "average" for "shit".

average is your synonym for shit. However average infers consistency. if you think the Southampton away game and the Barnsley game were consistent I'll agree with what you say.

[unreachable]

Condescending.

I've watched England games where every player seemed to be crap - therefore in your world they are.

I've watched Messi have poor games - he must be crap.

I've seen Pele, Maradona and Frankie Wortho have poor games they must be shit.

Leicester are in the championship. Many of the players have the required quality to put us in the promotion places. they don't have the consistency to do that.

I haven't used words "crap" and "shit" unlike yourself. My point is that there is a difference between good, bad and average players. Your definition of quality seems to have a lower threshold than my definition.

[unreachable]

average is your synonym for shit. However average infers consistency. if you think the Southampton away game and the Barnsley game were consistent I'll agree with what you say.

That just shows you have little grasp of English. Read a dictionary and then return to this thread.

[flowwolf]

You all talk such utter Bollocks.

[Guest]

No. I'm saying Beckford is one of the few players in our squad who has had a poor season but who might actually be a quality player. Maybe Danns too. Nugent, Konchesky and Schmeichel have been consistent.

If we've got so many quality players why have we had 2 different managers and we're still midtable?

Well I'll disagree and say that Nugent has far more quality than Beckford.

Beckford has been incredibly inconsistent though whereas Nugent, Konchesky and Schmeichel have been far more consistent. FYI I'd say that these three players are good quality though Konch is starting to suffer the signs of age.

With regards your final question I'd answer that Sven was sacked far too soon, I was happy with the way the squad was coming together and how close we were to the playoffs when he was sacked. I'd say that NP is blinkered in his tactics and inept offensively but the fact that we've had 2 managers (so different in their ideas and philosophy) in one season is another reason that we are mid-table.

I'd also blame Beckford.

[Guest]

That just shows you have little grasp of English. Read a dictionary and then return to this thread.

average is the "mean" there can be nothing more consistent than the mean. I suggest you take your superiority elsewhere or try it out on someone else.

You all talk such utter Bollocks.

[Happy Fox]

Well I'll disagree and say that Nugent has far more quality than Beckford.

Beckford has been incredibly inconsistent though whereas Nugent, Konchesky and Schmeichel have been far more consistent. FYI I'd say that these three players are good quality though Konch is starting to suffer the signs of age.

With regards your final question I'd answer that Sven was sacked far too soon, I was happy with the way the squad was coming together and how close we were to the playoffs when he was sacked. I'd say that NP is blinkered in his tactics and inept offensively but the fact that we've had 2 managers (so different in their ideas and philosophy) in one season is another reason that we are mid-table.

I'd also blame Beckford.

That is an interesting thought you pose the philosophy, Sven's philosophy and NP's are totally different do you give time for NP to impose his philosophy? you could argue that Sven's style of football of trying to emulate Swansea for them it is paying dividends in the prem, NP's static philosophy may not work in the prem imo.

[Guest]

That's because they are, at international level. Mentally as much as anything.

As for the rest of it, see my above post about Messi and Dyer.

Well there you have your misunderstanding.

I'm using the word quality to signify a player who can get us in a playoff/promotion place in the Championship, maybe even stay with the club in the lower levels of the Prem. you seem to think quality only applies to Messi.

[Guest]

That is an interesting thought you pose the philosophy, Sven's philosophy and NP's are totally different do you give time for NP to impose his philosophy? you could argue that Sven's style of football of trying to emulate Swansea for them it is paying dividends in the prem, NP's static philosophy may not work in the prem imo.

Sven is Plato, to Nigel's Vinnie.

[Kitchandro]

Well I'll disagree and say that Nugent has far more quality than Beckford.

Beckford has been incredibly inconsistent though whereas Nugent, Konchesky and Schmeichel have been far more consistent. FYI I'd say that these three players are good quality though Konch is starting to suffer the signs of age.

I didn't say Beckford had more quality than Nugent. I suggested he might be a quality player at this level (based on what I've seen from him in glimpses this season and for Leeds and Everton) but that he's had a bad season.

With regards your final question I'd answer that Sven was sacked far too soon, I was happy with the way the squad was coming together and how close we were to the playoffs when he was sacked. I'd say that NP is blinkered in his tactics and inept offensively but the fact that we've had 2 managers (so different in their ideas and philosophy) in one season is another reason that we are mid-table.

I'd also blame Beckford.

But that doesn't answer why we were playing so poorly and were in the bottom half when Sven was sacked. Sacking him 'too soon' is a completely different argument to whether we were actually any good. I wasn't sure whether we should have just given him a bit longer, but at the same time I knew we weren't good enough to go up. People forget that Sven was underachieving even if he got into the play-offs. We spent twice as much as anyone else and we rightly expected to get automatic promotion.

As for the 'squad coming together' - it wasn't, the players had largely lost faith in Sven and our performances, and league positions, was getting worse. So why on earth did you see any promise in that/this team?

[Kitchandro]

Well there you have your misunderstanding.

I'm using the word quality to signify a player who can get us in a playoff/promotion place in the Championship, maybe even stay with the club in the lower levels of the Prem. you seem to think quality only applies to Messi.

No.

I'm saying our players have no where near enough quality to get us up.

Bloody hell, it took a while to spell out a very basic point to you.

[Happy Fox]

I didn't say Beckford had more quality than Nugent. I suggested he might be a quality player at this level (based on what I've seen from him in glimpses this season and for Leeds and Everton) but that he's had a bad season.

But that doesn't answer why we were playing so poorly and were in the bottom half when Sven was sacked. Sacking him 'too soon' is a completely different argument to whether we were actually any good. I wasn't sure whether we should have just given him a bit longer, but at the same time I knew we weren't good enough to go up. People forget that Sven was underachieving even if he got into the play-offs. We spent twice as much as anyone else and we rightly expected to get automatic promotion.

As for the 'squad coming together' - it wasn't, the players had largely lost faith in Sven and our performances, and league positions, was getting worse. So why on earth did you see any promise in that/this team?

It looks like they are loosing faith under NP as well maybe the players are the problem after all? Or maybe the manager is?

[unreachable]

average is the "mean" there can be nothing more consistent than the mean. I suggest you take your superiority elsewhere or try it out on someone else.

It's pointless submitting opinions to a public forum when you assign your own meanings to words in your own little imaginary language. I repeat "average" and "shit" are not the same.

[Kitchandro]

It looks like they are loosing faith under NP as well maybe the players are the problem after all? Or maybe the manager is?

Well, which one is it then?

[Guest]

I didn't say Beckford had more quality than Nugent. I suggested he might be a quality player at this level (based on what I've seen from him in glimpses this season and for Leeds and Everton) but that he's had a bad season.

But that doesn't answer why we were playing so poorly and were in the bottom half when Sven was sacked. Sacking him 'too soon' is a completely different argument to whether we were actually any good. I wasn't sure whether we should have just given him a bit longer, but at the same time I knew we weren't good enough to go up. People forget that Sven was underachieving even if he got into the play-offs. We spent twice as much as anyone else and we rightly expected to get automatic promotion.

As for the 'squad coming together' - it wasn't, the players had largely lost faith in Sven and our performances, and league positions, was getting worse. So why on earth did you see any promise in that/this team?

We were in spitting distance of the playoffs with a loooong time to go. The players hadn't had so many games together either, what with new purchases and with injuries to starters - like Vassell.

My position is clear. Sven wasn't given enough time, the team has some quality players, the team has some inconsistent players, the team has some prima donnas. So we're going round in circles.

[kyle09uk]

To be honest I think squad rotation

could have been key to success this

season. Never change a winning team, I

believe to have been our undoing.

Sometimes I think a wee break for a

player can be of benefit, unless there

names Iniesta and wears their shirt on

their sleeve!

[Happy Fox]

Well, which one is it then?

Both perhaps , no in all honesty I don't know anymore, did the players I mean all of them look like they are playing for the manager? Or has the manager lost faith in the players in question, maybe it works both ways but judging by our league position I would hazard a guess that it is both the manager and the players fault with regards to this situation. I honestly don't think for one moment the current crop of players are midtable mediocrity standard at the very least playoff place so in the Thais opinion it is the manager who is always culpable.

[Guest]

It's pointless submitting opinions to a public forum when you assign your own meanings to words in your own little imaginary language. I repeat "average" and "shit" are not the same.

You're still trying your superior approach I see.

So if you're not quetioning quality and inconsistent wich were the words I used we'll move onto your new completely pointless argument.

Shit and average - Tomarto and Tomayto

Both words are quantifiers and therefore a form of comparison.

What is the qualitative difference between "Great and average" and "Good enough and shit" ?

Your "average" means that they are not good enough to get promotion. My "shit" means that they are not Great enough to get promotion. My word though is more colourful and demonstrative whilst yours is boring and plain. Possibly sums us up.