Darkon84 Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 Grrr the bloody multiquote thing failed and didn't post. Basically, I wasn't necessarily saying we should have played Wellens/King, just in reponse to peoples lack of confidence in Bamba, that it was simply an option. Yes we don't know how fit Wellens/King were, only Pearson did, we are but mere humble supporters Babs, nice point about them being his favourites, and I'm sure, had they been fit, one, or both would have started...perhaps they have had a bust up with Pearson
Babylon Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 ...perhaps they have had a bust up with Pearson Don't....
Darkon84 Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 Don't.... I'm just saying.....they could have Wheres a picture of a can of worms when you need one.
KidKunny Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 Soon as the name Beckford appeared on this thread, I knew sh*t was going down
5waller5 Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 If NP had have thought when he got down to 3 fit midfielders "Oh I might need a loan player" then it might not have been necessary.... No, too critical of NP - it had already happened how could he get someone in that day?? If NP had have thought when he got down to 4 fit midfielders "Oh I might need a loan player" then it might not have been necessary.... Hang on - that's too critical of NP, after all how could he predict such a situation where one of them might not be available??? If NP had have thought when he got down to 5 fit midfielders "Oh I might need a loan player" then it might not have been necessary.... He prefers a midfield 4 so could have been worried about an injury or suspension?? Sorry ... I'm being entirely unreasonable to think that NP could have made a loan move and not had to play a centre back and a striker in midfield and change to a formation he doesn't favour.
Babylon Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 If NP had have thought when he got down to 3 fit midfielders "Oh I might need a loan player" then it might not have been necessary.... No, too critical of NP - it had already happened how could he get someone in that day?? If NP had have thought when he got down to 4 fit midfielders "Oh I might need a loan player" then it might not have been necessary.... Hang on - that's too critical of NP, after all how could he predict such a situation where one of them might not be available??? If NP had have thought when he got down to 5 fit midfielders "Oh I might need a loan player" then it might not have been necessary.... He prefers a midfield 4 so could have been worried about an injury or suspension?? Sorry ... I'm being entirely unreasonable to think that NP could have made a loan move and not had to play a centre back and a striker in midfield and change to a formation he doesn't favour. Perhaps because prior to the Blackpool game we didn't have any major problem in midfield, we had a midfielder spare on the bench and Andy King closing on a return from injury. The transfer window closed the next day. You really think a manager should go out and sign players for each position in the off chance we pick up three injuries against Blackpool (Wellens, Danns and Drinkwater were doubtful for Hull), that two of them would make for Hull and then one of them would get himself sent off? Why didn't he sign a replacement keeper just in case Kasper and Logan got injured, why not get another centre back in case two of them get injured. And heaven forbid we lost two strikers in two games, why not get a replacement for them whilst we are at it.
Mark_w Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 Sorry ... I'm being entirely unreasonable to think that NP could have made a loan move and not had to play a centre back and a striker in midfield and change to a formation he doesn't favour. He did try to get a midfielder on loan, but was unsuccessfull in his attempts, we only became aware of the problem very shortly before the closure of the window. And if you think that is a reason to sack a manager then you need your head examining.
Mav Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 The 4-4-3 has been shit for Beckford and Nugent. Will be glad for the 4-4-2. Never seen the 4-4-3 before, im guessing thats what Man Utd play at Old Trafford? Is it decent though....
dedlock Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 Pearson is an intelligent,flexible coach despite what may be suggested by others. We were succesful in his first spell based on strong defence and an adaptable midfield. The second spell is characterised by fitting square pegs into round holes,trying to adapt Sven's personnel to his preferred system.I suspect 433,451 or4231 is what NP wants, strong in defence, quick and lethal on the break.If Beckford ,and others,fit,adapt and score,great.If not,expect changes in the summer.
5waller5 Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 He did try to get a midfielder on loan, but was unsuccessfull in his attempts, we only became aware of the problem very shortly before the closure of the window. And if you think that is a reason to sack a manager then you need your head examining. At no point in any thread have i suggested sacking the manager .... I'm uninspired by him, i think he's got alot to prove, I think he get's things wrong, but I'm actually pretty ambivalent whether he stays or not. It would be a shame if he were sacked though. But I'm not sure he's done enough to avoid it. So no, I don't think that's enough to sack a manager .... but don't let anything get in the way of pigeon-holing people in to LOVE / HATE Pearson camp.
Jakemoore Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 The formation is definitely a 4-2-3-1, not a 4-3-3. Surely I'm not the only one thinking this every time it's mentioned EDIT: Not that it matters, I'm just in a bad mood I wouldn't describe it as being "in a bad mood" I'd just refer to it as being a Leicester City fan!
5waller5 Posted 5 April 2012 Posted 5 April 2012 Perhaps because prior to the Blackpool game we didn't have any major problem in midfield, we had a midfielder spare on the bench and Andy King closing on a return from injury. The transfer window closed the next day. You really think a manager should go out and sign players for each position in the off chance we pick up three injuries against Blackpool (Wellens, Danns and Drinkwater were doubtful for Hull), that two of them would make for Hull and then one of them would get himself sent off? Why didn't he sign a replacement keeper just in case Kasper and Logan got injured, why not get another centre back in case two of them get injured. And heaven forbid we lost two strikers in two games, why not get a replacement for them whilst we are at it. I think it's his job to be prepared. We got the striker from villa when we didn't really need him ... but that was a good move as it gave us options... we had no options in midfield and he'd let the squad players go - just seems sensible to get a spare player in for a department that only has one spare player to cover four positions. But hey .... NP can do nothing wrong. I'm sorry I've criticised the Messiah!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.